tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38780430656274332412017-08-17T14:03:53.625-04:00Patrick HrubyWriter | Editor | JournalistPatrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comBlogger536125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-26732334071597223622017-07-14T18:20:00.003-04:002017-07-14T18:20:54.619-04:00NFL Class Warfare<a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman says a labor walkout is necessary to get concessions from league owners. But the have-and-have-not economy fostered by the 2011 CBA may make a strike less likely.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | July 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">R</span>ichard Sherman is right. There's only one way for NFL players to get guaranteed contracts—or really, any other concessions—from league owners. And it doesn't involve asking nicely. <br /><br />"If we want as the NFL, as a union, to get anything done, players have to be willing to strike," the Seattle Seahawks cornerback <a href="http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/19976380/richard-sherman-seattle-seahawks-says-nfl-players-need-willingness-strike-get-bigger-salaries" target="_blank">told ESPN</a> on Wednesday. "That's the thing that guys need to 100 percent realize.<br /><br />"You're going to have to miss games, you're going to have to lose some money if you're willing to make the point, because that's how MLB and NBA got it done. They missed games, they struck, they flexed every bit of power they had, and it was awesome. It worked out for them."<br /><br />If this sounds like Bargaining 101 for Dummies—<i>use the leverage you have to force the outcome you want, duh</i>—well, that's how power works. Heading into its next round of collective bargaining, the NFL Players Association will be exactly as strong—or as weak—as the ability of its members to stand together, withhold their labor, shut the sport down, and take one on the financial chin so that owners, advertisers, and broadcasters take one, too.<br /><br />Given what happened the last time the union struck a deal with the league, Sherman and his peers may be severely hamstrung. They've been put in a position where the haves and the have-nots might not find common ground. <br /><br />Look, walking out on work is hard. Especially for football players. They play a brutal sport, and typically have a short window of time to earn what they can before their brains and bodies break. Forming a picket line means giving up money they'll never get back, all so somebody else can make more in the future. It's not particularly surprising <a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1994-08-14/sports/9408140280_1_strike-picket-lines-nfl-system" target="_blank">that the NFLPA historically has been lousy at it.</a><br /><br />That said, the league's current collective bargaining agreement likely makes a potential future strike even tougher. How so? Start with the bottom line. Under the previous agreement negotiated by former union head Gene Upshaw in 2006, players received 59 percent of annual NFL revenues minus a roughly $1 billion set-aside that went directly into owners' pockets; under the current deal negotiated by NLFPA executive director DeMaurice Smith in 2011, players receive 47 percent, minus a similar set-aside.<br /><br />In other words: players took an 12 percent haircut that former player Sean Gilbert estimated would <a href="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/02/18/sean-gilbert-de-smiths-lack-of-football-knowledge-will-cost-players-10-billion/" target="_blank">cost players $10 billion</a> over the ten-year life of the agreement. Former NFLPA executive committee member Sean Morey <a href="http://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/gv7737/who-ruined-the-nfl-players-union">told VICE Sports that amount could be closer to $15 billion</a>. Whatever the final number ends up being, every dollar clawed back gives owners more resources to ride out a possible work stoppage when the current CBA expires in 2020—and more importantly, saps the union's ability to fill a war chest of its own, something players will need if they're foregoing paychecks.<br /><br />But that's not the most union-busty thing about it.<br /><br />It's one thing to end up with a smaller slice of the money pie; sometimes that happens. It's quite another to agree to divvy up that slice in a way that weakens—albeit inadvertently—your own position. And that's what the CBA seems to do, primarily by fostering what former Tampa Bay Buccaneers general manager <a href="http://theringer.com/nfl-free-agency-players-losing-leverage-864759d6cbdb" target="_blank">Mark Dominik told Kevin Clark of The Ringer is "a have-and-have-not league"</a> in which a small number of star veterans earn big bucks while the rest of the labor pool becomes increasingly younger, cheaper, and more disposable.<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500050103236-USATSI_9861046.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">When the unintended consequences of the CBA may be making your job harder. Photo by Mark J. Rebilas-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"><source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500050103236-USATSI_9861046.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500050103236-USATSI_9861046.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500050103236-USATSI_9861046.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500050103236-USATSI_9861046.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500050103236-USATSI_9861046.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500050103236-USATSI_9861046.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500050103236-USATSI_9861046.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500050103236-USATSI_9861046.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source><source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500050103236-USATSI_9861046.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500050103236-USATSI_9861046.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source></picture><br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>Modern NFL rosters look <a href="http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/most-americans-arent-middle-class-anymore" target="_blank">a lot like the shifting American economy</a>. The rich get richer. Almost everyone else fights for scraps. Consider the New England Patriots: <a href="http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/new-england-patriots/" target="_blank">according to the NFL salary database at </a><a href="http://spotrac.com/" target="_blank">spotrac.com</a><a href="http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/new-england-patriots/" target="_blank">,</a> the defending champions have three players making more than $10 million a year, six making more than $5 million, and 53 making less than $1 million (the latter number of players will drop following training camp and preseason roster cuts). Similarly, <a href="http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/rankings/average/atlanta-falcons/" target="_blank">the Super Bowl runner-up Atlanta Falcons</a> have three players making more than $10 million, six making more than $5 million, and 61 making less than $1 million.<br /><br />Why the divide? According to Clark, franchises have become increasingly adept at structuring player contracts in ways that are "eradicating the NFL's middle class and costing its lower tier much of its leverage"—mostly through language that reduces pay if players get hurt and/or fail to make their teams' 46-man gameday rosters. Former NFL player-turned-injury insurance salesman Nick Grisen told Clark that those two tricks cost players at least $48 million in 2015 and 2016.<br /><br />However, the primary culprit is how the CBA treats rookies. Before 2011, incoming players were free to bargain with the teams that drafted them; today, they're subject to a wage scale, three-year renegotiation waiting periods, and team contract options that all conspire to suppress salaries. The last top draft pick under the old agreement, quarterback Sam Bradford, signed a contract worth a guaranteed $50 million; by contrast, the first top pick under the current deal, quarterback Cam Newton, received only $22 million guaranteed.<br /><br />When the NFLPA agreed to limit rookie pay, the idea was that salary savings would end up in the pockets of experienced players. That's exactly what has happened—for a fortunate few. Otherwise, teams have been incentivized to <i> avoid</i> pricey and (presumably) injury-prone veterans, the better to load up on healthy, hungry, cost-controlled youngsters. <a href="http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2013/07/20/nfl-owners-destroyed-players-cba-negotiations/ia3c1ydpS16H5FhFEiviHP/story.html" target="_blank">As Ben Volin of the <i> Boston Globe</i> explains</a>:<br /><div class="article__blockquote"><br /></div><blockquote class="tr_bq">Why would a team pay big money to a free agent when it can simply draft a cheaper, healthier alternative and have him locked in to a near-minimum salary for at least three seasons?<br />While the CBA promises minimum salaries for veterans—$715,000 this year for players with 4-6 years of experience, $840,000 for 7-9, and $940,000 for 10-plus—many times it works against them.<br />"I've had teams tell me all the time, 'Your guy is a minimum-salary guy, he's too expensive,' " [an] agent said. "I have veteran players that would play for $50,000 if they could." </blockquote><br />Last year, <a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-shrinking-shelf-life-of-nfl-players-1456694959" target="_blank">the Wall Street Journal reported</a> that after remaining constant over a 17-year span, NFL career lengths were shrinking at an "unprecedented rate"—dropping by about two and a half years from 2008 to 2014. <a href="http://theringer.com/the-nfl-has-an-age-problem-7068825845e4" target="_blank">Clark reports that the number of NFL players age 31 or older</a> has fallen 20 percent from a decade ago. Volin notes that in 2016, about half of the league's players were 25 or younger—which means most of them were still locked into their rookie contracts.<br /><br />The overall result? A star system economy in which the NFL's on-field labor force is split into two castes:<br /><br />1. A well-paid minority of recognizable veteran players, mostly quarterbacks, who through skill and injury luck have managed to become the league's equivalent of the <i> petite bourgeoisie;</i><br /><br />2. A poorly-paid majority of disposable, relatively anonymous short-timers who function as the league's <i> proletariat</i>, grinding and hoping to last long enough to make it into the upper class.<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500049809137-USATSI_10033416.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">When only one of your is locked into a cost-controlled salary for the next half-decade. Photo by Bill Streicher-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"><source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500049809137-USATSI_10033416.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500049809137-USATSI_10033416.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500049809137-USATSI_10033416.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500049809137-USATSI_10033416.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500049809137-USATSI_10033416.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500049809137-USATSI_10033416.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500049809137-USATSI_10033416.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500049809137-USATSI_10033416.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source><source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500049809137-USATSI_10033416.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1500049809137-USATSI_10033416.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source></picture><br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>NFL income inequality isn't all bad. Nor is it totally avoidable. The league always will have superstars, as well as third-string special teams fodder. <br /><br />Still, the unintended hollowing out of a healthy middle class may have severe consequences for union strength and solidarity. Imagine it's 2020. You're Smith or a player union leader, trying to rally your members for a strike—or maybe just imploring them not to cross a picket line, even though their mortgages are going unpaid and their bills are piling up. <br /><br />How much motivation do star players have to fight tooth-and-nail against a league that's already taking pretty good care of them? Conversely, how many of your rookie scale players want to drag out a work stoppage in which every missed game check represents a significant chunk of all the money they'll ever be able to earn playing football?<br /><br />For NFL owners, this is the sneaky genius of the current CBA—in fact, I'd be surprised if league negotiators back in 2011 didn't see probable player class stratification as a feature of the deal, not a bug. In 1999, <a href="http://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/02/basketball-union-chris-paul-players-association-contract-salary-cap/" target="_blank">NBA owners took advantage of infighting between star and rank-and-file union members</a> to negotiate a CBA that limited the maximum amount of money any one player could make; in 2011, the league exploited the same divide to slash the players' share of overall NBA revenues by seven percent.<br /><br />NFL owners aren't strangers to this tactic. When the league and union were battling over allowing free agency in the late 1980s and 1990s, the NFLPA used group licensing revenue to fund a series of antitrust lawsuits against the NFL. In response, <a href="http://deadspin.com/how-nfl-quarterback-jersey-sales-nearly-destroyed-the-u-1773300860" target="_blank">a clever league marketing executive named Frank Vuono devised a plan to undercut the union's efforts:</a> convince top quarterbacks to stop assigning their licensing rights to the NFLPA, and instead partner with the league in order to make more money for themselves.<br /><br />Vuono called his concept "the Quarterback Club." He promised players between $20,000 and $100,000 of extra annual income, cash they wouldn't have to share with their fellow union members. Most of the game's biggest stars—John Elway, Dan Marino, Troy Aikman, and Phil Simms among them—bought in. (As Matthew Futterman notes in his book <i> Players: The Star of Sports and Money, and the Visionaries Who Fought to Create a Revolution</i>, Joe Montana never joined, but only because he wanted to be paid more than anyone else). The QB Club and the union's licensing arm, Players Inc., <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/sports/qb-club-run-money-article-1.854625" target="_blank">sparred on and off for the next decade</a>, and it wasn't until the NFLPA <i> bought</i> the QB Club from the league in 2002 for a reported $4 million that the players were <a href="http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2002/02/Issue-96/Sponsorships-Advertising-Marketing/NFLPA-Purchases-Rights-To-Quarterback-Club-For-$4M.aspx?hl=NFL%2520Quarterback%2520Club&amp;sc=0" target="_blank">"made whole again."</a><br /><br />The lesson? Divide and conquer works. Which brings us back to Sherman, and the upcoming CBA negotiations. Could players actually exercise maximum show-stopping leverage, either by striking or credibly threatening to do so? It's possible. <a href="http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2721012-how-the-nfl-is-cheating-rookies-out-of-millions-of-dollars?" target="_blank">They know they got walloped on the last deal</a>; they're <a href="http://www.thescore.com/news/1327442" target="_blank">openly envious of the big-money guaranteed contracts being handed out in the NBA</a>; they're increasingly tired of commissioner Roger Goodell and the league handing them Ls on everything from <a href="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/04/28/roger-goodell-marijuana-is-addictive-and-unhealthy/" target="_blank">player discipline</a> to <a href="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2017/04/28/roger-goodell-marijuana-is-addictive-and-unhealthy/" target="_blank">marijuana use</a> to <a href="http://deadspin.com/whats-actually-new-about-the-nfls-new-concussion-policy-1784480451" target="_blank">brain trauma protection</a>. On the other hand, it's difficult to maintain solidarity when your credit card is being declined, or when rocking the boat might cost you a yacht. A financial house divided cannot stand—and as NFL players spoil for a 2020 fight, they would do well to look a little less like <i> Downton Abbey.</i><br /><br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/43d783/the-nfls-growing-class-divide-could-undermine-a-potential-player-strike"><b>Read the original article at VICE Sports</b></a>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-54450978292688528232017-07-14T18:14:00.000-04:002017-07-14T18:23:16.577-04:00Football's Brain Injury Crisis Isn't Just for Star Players<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-h5KIiyhI9XU/WWlAjtmb4DI/AAAAAAAADyo/NKwSvhWE1fga2iz7PDtuTQ-2OC9rkkalACLcBGAs/s1600/1499716665584-USATSI_7620836.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" data-original-height="808" data-original-width="1440" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-h5KIiyhI9XU/WWlAjtmb4DI/AAAAAAAADyo/NKwSvhWE1fga2iz7PDtuTQ-2OC9rkkalACLcBGAs/s1600/1499716665584-USATSI_7620836.jpg" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Former NFL linebacker Ka'Lial Glaud's struggle with post-concussion syndrome illustrates how the sport's fringe performers have greater incentive to put their health at risk—and fewer resources to cope with lasting damage.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | July 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">K</span>a'Lial Glaud has a headache. Every second of every day, he says. Ever since suffering his first and only diagnosed concussion in the National Football League nearly two years ago.<br /><br />A 26-year-old former linebacker who spent most of three NFL seasons with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Glaud has been diagnosed with post-concussion syndrome, a disorder in which symptoms such as dizziness, light sensitivity, and intense headaches persist long after someone experiences an initial brain injury.<br /><br />Medications haven't brought Glaud relief. Nor has therapy. He isn't well enough to work, and he can't go back to Rutgers University to finish his undergraduate degree—not when reading for more than half an hour leaves his eyes exhausted and head throbbing.<br /><br />Recently, Glaud says, it took all he had just to walk on a Stairmaster and then cut the grass at his home in Asbury Park, New Jersey. <br /><br />"I was down for four days [afterward]," he says. "I told a doctor, 'It's like I can feel my brain.' They said that's impossible. But it feels like someone is inside my head and has their hands around my brain, and they're squeezing it."<br /><br />It's been more than a decade since doctors discovered the neurodegenerative disease chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) in deceased Pittsburgh Steelers center Mike Webster, a revelation that helped make brain trauma in football an ongoing national story. Much of the subsequent fan and media focus has been on star players, like <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/gvz3bj/gisele-bundchen-says-tom-brady-had-concussion-last-year">New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady allegedly hiding a concussion last season</a>, and worst-case medical outcomes, like <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/topic/junior-seau">Hall of Fame linebacker Junior Seau</a> being posthumously diagnosed with CTE after committing suicide in 2012.<br /><br />However, fringe performers such as Glaud—training camp invitees, practice squad members, players at the bottom of depth charts—are just as vulnerable as the sport's marquee names, maybe even more so. Fighting for jobs and paychecks in the league, they arguably have greater incentive to put their brains at risk and fewer resources to cope with any lasting damage. <br /><br />Even when those ailments are less severe than CTE, they still can be debilitating. Glaud was concussed in September of 2015, and since then his life has been a fog of frustration and depression.<br /><br />"Everyone you hear about, they played for ten, 15 years," Glaud says. "I had three, one of those on the practice squad and another on injured reserve. I didn't play that daggone long. And it has affected me. I think about it every day."<br /><hr /><div class="article__text--dropcap">Glaud doesn't remember the hit. He was playing for the Dallas Cowboys in the team's final preseason game, trying to earn a roster spot. </div><br />One moment, Glaud was calling plays and setting defensive fronts; the next, he was on the sideline, telling teammate Sean Lee that nothing was wrong—even though Glaud couldn't recall those same plays and fronts when one of his coaches was going through game video on a tablet computer.<br /><i><br /></i> <i> Are you sure you're OK?</i><br /><i><br /></i> <i> I'm fine.</i><br /><i><br /></i> <i> I think I'll have a doctor look at you.</i><br /><br />"I asked Shawn not to," Glaud says. "Then I went back out on special teams. When I came off again, he was there with trainers to evaluate me."<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716245193-USATSI_8746643.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Ka'Lial Glaud (No. 47) in a 2015 preseason game with the Dallas Cowboys. Photo by Jake Roth-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"><source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716245193-USATSI_8746643.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716245193-USATSI_8746643.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716245193-USATSI_8746643.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716245193-USATSI_8746643.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716245193-USATSI_8746643.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716245193-USATSI_8746643.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716245193-USATSI_8746643.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716245193-USATSI_8746643.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source><source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716245193-USATSI_8746643.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716245193-USATSI_8746643.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source></picture><br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>Team doctors took Glaud back to the Cowboys' locker room and told him remove his uniform. He figured that he would be fine. He suffered two diagnosed concussions at Rutgers, he says, and both times sat out practice for about a week before returning to the field. The injuries didn't stop him from starting all 13 games his senior year, or from appearing in seven games for Tampa Bay as an undrafted rookie in 2013.<br /><br />This time was different. Back at the team hotel, Glaud was nauseous. He threw up when he tried to eat. Riding elevators made him dizzy, and he didn't want to leave his darkened room. Diagnosed with post-concussion syndrome, he spent the season on injured reserve, unable to clear the Cowboys' return-to-play protocols. <br /><br />The team sent Glaud to a neurocognitive therapy center. There, he performed rehab tasks like staring at a target while shaking his head. His scores improved over time, he says, but his headaches didn't. If anything, activity made them worse. Near the end of the 2015 season, the Cowboys sent him home to New Jersey. <br /><br />Glaud hasn't played football since. Still sensitive to light, he says he wears sunglasses "just about all the time." He can walk on a treadmill, but he can't run or lift weights without getting dizzy. He has to read things repeatedly to make sense of them, and has trouble sleeping—drifting off in the middle of the night, waking up before dawn, unable to nap in between.<br /><br />Then there's Glaud's perma-headache. So many things can make it worse, from sudden noises to trips to the grocery store. "If I go out to dinner with a bunch of friends, I'll have headaches and feel floaty," he says. "And I will pay for it later that night or the next day."<br /><br />Glaud is close to his family: his parents Marlon and Wanda, who served in the United States Navy; his brothers Anthony and Sharif, who both played college football; his wife, Kassandra Laine, a supervisor at a health insurance company, and their three-year-old son, Kingston. He wills himself to be upbeat for them, less irritable and worn down. "I try to put away my pain," Glaud says, "and act like everything is normal and OK with me."<br /><br />It isn't. On the Fourth of July, Glaud, Kassandra, and Kingston drove to the beach to watch a fireworks show. Glaud never left the car. "We even parked kind of far away from everyone and everything," Kassandra says. "But it was still loud, and there were a lot of people. Afterward, he was so nauseous. He felt like he had to throw up the entire night.<br /><br />"You want to be able to enjoy life as it was. And Ka'Lial loves fireworks. So he made the sacrifice to go. But it's so hard for him to recover from doing something so small."<br /><br />Kingston is a typical toddler—when he's happy, he's rambunctious; when he's grumpy, he's a handful. Either way, Glaud says, it doesn't take much to feel like those fingers are digging into his brain. <br /><br />"He doesn't know what he's doing, yelling or screaming or playing with a toy, and then he starts crying," Glaud says. "And it can be hard for me not to snap or yell."<br /><br />When that happens, Glaud has to excuse himself. Nothing hurts more.<br /><br />"I'll go sit in my car, or sit in a room by myself," he says. "It's like, 'dang, what are you doing? That's a doggone baby.'"<br /><hr /><div class="article__text--dropcap">Glaud sees a visual therapist. A functional neurologist. A chiropractor. A cognitive therapist who doubles as an emotional counselor. He practices memorization with flash cards and numbers, works on his balance and eye movement, gets coaching to improve his ability to think and concentrate. He has cycled through four different migraine and mood medications. So far, none of it has helped. He's looking into Botox injections, which have been approved by the FDA to treat chronic headaches, and a numbing agent that would be injected into his upper neck.</div><br />"I've put over 50,000 miles on my car in less than a year, and I don't go anywhere else but to doctor's appointments," he says.<br /><br />Glaud still loves football. If doctors cleared him to play, he'd be tempted to put on a helmet. He has a number of friends in the NFL, and believes that the league can do more to prevent them from getting seriously hurt—and to help people like him once they are.<br /><br />Start with concussion education. Athletes, Glaud says, need more of it. At Rutgers and with Dallas, it was teammates who noticed he was hurt. Glaud had no idea. <br /><br />"Growing up, a concussion to me was like when somebody gets knocked out, or they get up and they look like they're drunk," he says. "Even in the NFL, nobody ever explained to me what a concussion actually was. I got most of my education from what is happening to me right now, and going to all these doctors. <br /><br />"If you look at the symptoms they tell you—seeing stars, being a little dizzy—there's probably 40 concussions among all the players in a football game. When I talk to my doctors now, they're like, 'Maybe you only got diagnosed with two concussions in college and one in the NFL, but you had a lot more.' Maybe I had way more than I can even think of. It's like, <i> dang.</i>"<br /><br />In May, retired NFL wide receiver Calvin Johnson <a href="http://www.freep.com/story/sports/nfl/lions/2017/05/21/calvin-johnson-nfl-concussions/335165001/" target="_blank">told the <i>Detroit Free Press</i> that he hid his concussions while playing for the Detroit Lions</a> because the team "needed him out there on the field." That attitude can be dangerous. Medical research indicates that suffering multiple concussions and suffering a second concussion while the symptoms of a previous concussion have not yet resolved both can increase the risk of short- and long-term neurological harm.<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716456786-USATSI_9020238.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Calvin Johnson claims he hid concussions during his nine-year NFL career. Photo by Tim Fuller-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"><source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716456786-USATSI_9020238.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716456786-USATSI_9020238.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716456786-USATSI_9020238.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716456786-USATSI_9020238.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716456786-USATSI_9020238.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716456786-USATSI_9020238.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716456786-USATSI_9020238.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716456786-USATSI_9020238.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source><source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716456786-USATSI_9020238.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1499716456786-USATSI_9020238.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source></picture><br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>In response, the NFL and other sports leagues have adopted rules and procedures designed to remove concussed athletes from play and to keep them sidelined until doctors clear them to return. Glaud is grateful for those rules: they kept him from continuing with the Cowboys, and possibly making his condition worse.<br /><br />He also thinks they should be stronger. Currently, the NFL requires players placed on injured reserve to remain there for the duration of the season. A <a href="https://www.scribd.com/document/348424990/Harvard-Exec-Summary-Recommendations#from_embed" target="_blank">recent Harvard Medical School report commissioned</a> by the NFL Players Association suggested creating a separate seven-day disabled list for concussed players—something Major League Baseball already does, and something the report says would reduce the pressure on athletes to hide concussions or return too quickly from brain injuries:<br /><div class="article__blockquote"><br /></div><blockquote class="tr_bq">A player's recovery time from a concussion can easily range from no games to several games. The uncertain recovery times create pressure on the player, club, and club doctor. Each roster spot is valuable and clubs constantly add and drop players to ensure they have the roster that gives them the greatest chance to win each game day. As a result of the uncertain recovery times for a concussion, clubs might debate whether they need to replace the player for that week or longer. The club doctor and player might also then feel pressure for the player to return to play as soon as possible. By exempting a concussed player from the 53 man roster, the club has the opportunity to sign a short term replacement player in the event the concussed player is unable to play. At the same time, the player and club doctor would have some of the return-to-play pressure removed.</blockquote><br />Glaud concurs. He also believes that guaranteeing more money to players regardless of injury would help. Johnson made over $100 million during his nine-year career. The average player earns much less over a much shorter span. Glaud knows active players who have hid concussions. One friend, he says, told him, <i> I know I'm going to be fucked up when this is over. </i><br /><br />"Calvin Johnson wanted to play because he had competitive spirit," Glaud says. "But if you're at the bottom of a roster or trying to make it, trying not to get cut, you're adding a whole financial aspect to it. A lot of us don't have nothing to go back home to."<br /><br />Ed Wasielewski, Glaud's agent, says that guaranteed contracts would be a "game-changer" for the health and well-being of rank-and-file NFL players. "As an agent for 15 years, I can tell you that players tend to try to rush back from certain injuries, including concussions," he says. "If the NFL and NFLPA could come up with some kind of system with a salary floor for each player, that would make a lot of sense.<br /><br />"The off-season runs from after the Super Bowl all the way to final [roster] cuts around Labor Day. Players are working with teams all the time. You can get a concussion in a simple tackling drill, or on a routine tackle or block. But because a player is incentivized to make the team in September—because that's the only way he makes his money—he's likely to hide concussion symptoms so he can continue to play and practice, feeling he has to tough it out because he can't make the 53-man roster from the training room."<br /><br />The NFL and the NFLPA offer benefits to former players with brain injuries, but Glaud mostly doesn't qualify. For example, the league retirement plan provides disability payments to former players with at least three "credited" seasons of experience. Glaud only has two, because one of his seasons was spent on the Buccaneers' practice squad. Similarly, the league's 88 Plan and class action concussion lawsuit settlement pay out cash to retirees suffering from dementia and other severe neurological disorders. Glaud's post-concussion syndrome doesn't rise to that level. <br /><br />The NBA, the NHL, and MLB generally offer lifetime health insurance to former players. <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/topic/battle-for-benefits">The NFL does not.</a> For now, worker's compensation covers the cost of Glaud's doctor's appointments. His wife's insurance pays for prescription medication. But the future is uncertain. What if Glaud never gets better? What if he can't go back to Rutgers and complete his degree in information technology, or work at a regular job?<br /><br />One of Glaud's doctors recommended a brain injury specialist at New York University. When Glaud called to set up an appointment, he found out the specialist didn't accept worker's comp. Another doctor referred him to a clinic located in New Mexico. "That one would cost me $10,000 out of pocket," he says. "I'm leery to spend that much with no guarantee of it working."<br /><br />Glaud has considered reaching out to Boston University and the University of North Carolina, where researchers are studying brain injury in football players, but hasn't yet picked up the phone. "I have a family and a child," he says. "I can't just get up and be gone for months."<br /><br />"I pray a lot," Kassandra says. "He prays a lot. He's been to so many doctors. We're both willing to do things to make him better, but we are both losing hope. Ka'Lial says all the time, 'Is this what the rest of my life is going to be like?'"<br /><hr /><div class="article__text--dropcap">Glaud earned about $350,000 in the NFL. He saved his money, and owns rental properties that generate income. Kingston is healthy. Kassandra has a good job. His family is supportive. He knows that things could be much worse.</div><br />"Imagine if you're on the practice squad for just one year, made almost nothing, now you're unable to get a job, you have a family, and your life is going to shit," Glaud says. "How are they going to afford gas to do to doctor's appointments every other day?"<br /><br />Two years ago, Glaud was preparing for training camp; today he's more likely to spend time lying on his floor, waiting for a headache to calm down. Playing football gave him goals to accomplish, obstacles to overcome, a daily routine and a sense of purpose. Now Glaud often wonders, <i> Does the NFL really care about concussions, or guys like him?</i> When he was in Texas, he says, the Cowboys checked in with him every day, but afterward, "it has been me by myself dealing with this shit." The sport moves on. Glaud is trying to do the same. Only his head still hurts. <br /><br />"Not that I need someone to hold my hand," he says. "But I didn't get hurt my damn self. It wasn't a car accident. I didn't fall out of a tree. I got hurt playing football. And I haven't been myself the whole damn time since."<br /><br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/evdbzw/footballs-brain-injury-crisis-isnt-just-for-star-players"><b>Read the original article at VICE Sports</b></a>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-20453058890569454082017-07-06T10:36:00.000-04:002017-07-12T10:37:27.242-04:00Office Talk<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-40mqX09OpEE/WWYzQq6501I/AAAAAAAADyE/_OdI-Svubtc99_c5xyN9wUSaTTspxoYGACLcBGAs/s1600/1499359440679-USATSI_9185560.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" data-original-height="899" data-original-width="1600" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-40mqX09OpEE/WWYzQq6501I/AAAAAAAADyE/_OdI-Svubtc99_c5xyN9wUSaTTspxoYGACLcBGAs/s1600/1499359440679-USATSI_9185560.jpg" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Bernard Tomic's only sin was being honest about his job.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | July 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">Y</span>ou're at happy hour after a long day at the office, having drinks with a co-worker. Let's call him, uh, Bernie. He's a mid-career professional, been around the block, mostly does good work. Not a company superstar, but he's pretty damn successful.<br /><br />Lately, though, Bernie's TPS reports have been uninspired. In fact, his most recent submission was downright sloppy. You ask him what's wrong, and he comes clean: he's a little bored. Not really hungry to conquer the corporate world, the way he once was as an intern. He's making good money, his output is generally perfectly fine, and he's thinking more and more about riding things out until he can drop anchor off Key West and crack open a cold one. <br /><br />In response, do you:<br /><br />a) Nod knowingly and order another round, because what he's saying sounds perfectly reasonable for an adult human being discussing their job;<br /><br />b) Throw your drink in his face and tell him to get his mind right, because <i>how dare he</i> disrespect himself, the company, Corporate America, and probably the Shaolin Temple by giving anything less than maximum, soul-emptying effort at all times.<br /><br />Did you go with B? Congratulations! You're probably a salty tennis fan. Earlier this week, Australian tennis player Bernard Tomic endured a lifeless, straight-sets loss to Germany's Mischa Zverev in the first round of Wimbledon, <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2..." target="_blank">then told reporters at a post-match press conference that he wasn't quite feeling it:</a><br /><blockquote class="tr_bq">"I wasn't mentally and physically there—I don't know why," Tomic told assembled reporters, swiveling around in his chair.<br /><br />"I felt a little bit bored out there to be completely honest with you. You know I tried at the end and stuff ... but it was too late."<br /><br />Warming to his theme of disenchantment, the 24-year-old Australian wasn't finished though.<br /><br />"Holding a trophy or doing well doesn't satisfy me anymore—it's not there," he added later in the media conference.<br /><br />"I couldn't care less if I make a fourth-round US Open or I lose first round. To me, its the same. I know I'm gonna play another 10 years and after my career I won't have to work again.<br /><br />"So, this is mental," he added, pointing a finger to his head.</blockquote>Reaction from the tennis world was swift, <a href="http://www.news.com.au/sport/tennis/world-reacts-to-bernard-tomics-wimbledon-horror-show/news-story/3b79d1e933cb2f38d988c3d7e93e9783" target="_blank">and largely harsh.</a> Martina Navratilova told the BBC that Tomic was disrespecting the sport and that he should "find another job." Racket maker Head <a href="http://www.espn.com/tennis/story/_/id/19853537/wimbledon-2017-bernard-tomic-dropped-racket-sponsors-head-outburst-which-saw-fined" target="_blank">dropped its sponsorship of Tomic.</a> ESPN analyst Brad Gilbert said he was <a href="http://www.espn.com/video/clip?id=19817082" target="_blank">"absolutely disgusted."</a> Pat Cash suggested that Tomic "go and work in a factory, do some labor and see what it's like to really work out there ... he is too rich, too early. It's as simple as that." <i>Sports Illustrated </i>tennis writer Jon Wertheim was more sympathetic—<a href="https://www.si.com/tennis/2017/07/05/wimbledon-mailbag-bernard-tomic-hawkeye-seedings" target="_blank">noting that Tomic's ennui might be related to having a notorious tennis father</a>—but also called Tomic's persistently halfhearted performances "disgraceful" and speculated that his press conference might have been a "cry for help" by a 24-year-old tennis pro possibly suffering from "a touch of mental illness."<br /><br />Hold up.<br /><br />Look, nobody wants to watch a pro athlete half-assing their way through a competition. Did you tune in or pay your own money for a ticket to watch Tomic flounder around drowsily? Fine. Get grumpy. Likewise, it's possible that his lackluster effort and post-match comments are signs of serious off-court issues—in which case, he deserves empathy, not scorn.<br /><br />But let's assume Tomic doesn't need professional help and take his words at face value. Read them again, take any nagging sports fandom you feel out of the equation, and think about what he's actually expressing: <i> I'm bored at the office. Closing the big deal doesn't leave me particularly fulfilled. Win or lose, the days all feel sort of the same, and frankly, I know I'm halfway to a comfortable retirement.</i> <br /><br />This is unusual? Upsetting? An affront to everything that's right and decent in sports? Please. These are totally normal, utterly unremarkable, downright <i>cliched</i> feelings for any middle-aged professional to have about work. Tennis is Tomic's job. Is it really so shocking for someone at the halfway point of their career to have this kind of <i>is this it?</i> moment?<br /><br />Tomic has been on the ATP Tour since he was 16 years old. He probably won't play until he's 36. He has enjoyed tremendous, world-beating success—winning three titles, earning $5 million in prize money, becoming the youngest player to reach the Wimbledon quarterfinals since Boris Becker, achieving a world ranking as high as No. 17. He is smart enough that he has likely figured out that he's never going to be Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, or even Pat Rafter. <br /><br />So now what? Sooner or later, most of us have to ask the same question about how we're earning our livings. Almost everyone starts out gung ho, but the corporate ladder runs out of rungs. The empty workplace booster rocket burns up in the atmosphere. In time you realize that you're not going to make it to the corner office, and that maybe it's not worth the effort to keep trying. Maybe you don't want the hassle of a job like that anyway. Maybe you've topped out, so now you're going through the motions, at least on some days. And that's cool, because you've worked long enough to be pretty darn good at those motions you're going through.<br /><br />And maybe all of the above is also okay, because real life isn't a Successories poster or a high school coach reminding you that <i>your altitude is determined by your attitude.</i><br /><br />Interestingly enough, retired Australian Rules football player star Adam Cooney seemed to grasp what the tennis establishment missed:<br /><br /><a href="http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--PJfCi7cIl8/WWYzy4w2A_I/AAAAAAAADyM/bXD_5afIE38bN5VE0lb4msAuq604b0vvwCK4BGAYYCw/s1600/1.jpeg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/--PJfCi7cIl8/WWYzy4w2A_I/AAAAAAAADyM/bXD_5afIE38bN5VE0lb4msAuq604b0vvwCK4BGAYYCw/s1600/1.jpeg" /></a><br /><br />It's weird to assume that athletes are somehow different than everyone else, or that they should be. It's one thing to want a good show, and quite another for people like Brad Gilbert to act as though Tomic committed a moral crime for having a lackluster day at the office. Remember, Tomic is currently ranked No. 59 in the world. There are approximately seven billion people on the planet, and he's better at tennis than 6,999,999,941 of them. That's not disrespecting the sport! That's pretty good! <br /><br />And really, <i>go get a factory job? </i>No disrespect to factory workers, but Tomic undoubtedly has worked harder and longer at being great with a racket than most people have at anything. You don't succeed in the ruthless, hyper-competitive world of pro sports any other way, regardless of how much talent you received at birth. Strip away the fantastical, childish, 110 Percent Effort Or GTFO logic of sports broadcasting, sports fandom, and—let's be totally honest here—racket-selling marketing, and the truly surprising thing about Tomic's admission wasn't that he made it. It's that more of his peers don't do the same.<br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/bjxmk4/bernard-tomics-only-sin-was-being-honest-about-his-job"><br /><b>Read the original article at VICE Sports</b></a>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-79369284713428859802017-06-29T10:26:00.000-04:002017-07-12T10:29:41.380-04:00Power Transfer<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LPKH4THbExQ/WWYyR6FV2ZI/AAAAAAAADyA/lQqDnuzzINYN_LoKnLh4LNDMwOX1lAWvQCLcBGAs/s1600/1498754827910-USATSI_9932932.jpg" imageanchor="1" ><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LPKH4THbExQ/WWYyR6FV2ZI/AAAAAAAADyA/lQqDnuzzINYN_LoKnLh4LNDMwOX1lAWvQCLcBGAs/s1600/1498754827910-USATSI_9932932.jpg" data-original-width="1600" data-original-height="900" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>The NCAA may loosen transfer rules that shouldn't exist in the first place.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | June 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">W</span>hen it comes to college athlete transfers, the National Collegiate Athletic Association may be on the cusp of—finally—doing something right. Earlier this week, the Division I Council Transfer Working Group <a href="http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/working-group-seeks-input-transfer-concepts?sf93724325=1" target="_blank">announced that it's considering altering current rules</a> that limit the ability of players to move from one school to another. The most notable rules up for consideration include those:<br /><ul><li>Requiring athletes to get permission from their current schools to speak with other schools;</li><li>Barring those athletes from receiving a scholarship from their new school without first getting said permission.</li></ul>Changes to both rules—and by <i>changes</i>, I mean scrapping them completely—are long overdue. As is, they are arbitrary, capricious, and philosophically absurd, giving coaches and athletic departments undue, unearned power over unpaid students seeking a better situation elsewhere. <br /><br />Case in point? Former Kansas State football player Corey Sutton, who earlier this year requested permission to contact 35 different schools—none of them in the Big 12 nor on the Wildcats' future schedule, not that either of those facts should really matter—and was denied by coach Bill Snyder, who <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/3kzn79/millionaire-bill-snyder-smears-unpaid-player-he-wont-let-transfer">subsequently defended his indefensible decision by publicly smearing Sutton as someone who had failed a pair of drug tests.</a><br /><br />Following an avalanche of bad press and Sutton calling him a "slave master" in a Tweet, <a href="http://www.kansascity.com/sports/college/big-12/kansas-state/article154057204.html" target="_blank">Snyder apologized</a> and relented, freeing the 19-year-old wide receiver to transfer to Appalachian State. Still, Sutton's perfectly reasonable, utterly normal desire to switch schools never should have been subject to Snyder's whims in the first place. The NCAA and its members schools have no business blocking, steering, and otherwise lording over athlete transfers. Not so long as they simultaneously claim that athletes are simply regular students who happen to be very good at sports, and not <i>de facto</i> athletic department and school marketing employees who ought be entitled to workplace rights and protections.<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1498755118741-USATSI_9719485.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Coaches like Bill Snyder have the power to lord over athlete transfers. Why? Photo by Jim Cowsert-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"><source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1498755118741-USATSI_9719485.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1498755118741-USATSI_9719485.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1498755118741-USATSI_9719485.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1498755118741-USATSI_9719485.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1498755118741-USATSI_9719485.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1498755118741-USATSI_9719485.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1498755118741-USATSI_9719485.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1498755118741-USATSI_9719485.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source><source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1498755118741-USATSI_9719485.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1498755118741-USATSI_9719485.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source></picture><br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>Indeed, the NCAA's current transfer rules are a prime example of how the powers-that-be in major college sports are primarily concerned with having and eating their cake. On one hand, the association will tell anyone who will listen—most notably, federal judges overseeing antitrust lawsuits—that it's perfectly legal and acceptable for schools to collude and limit player compensation to scholarships and small cost-of-attendance stipends, because athletes are students and amateurs and not professionals and <i>blah blah blah.</i><br /><i><br /></i> On the other hand, current transfer rules amount to non-compete clauses, in which employees agree not to join a competing firm for a specified period of time after leaving an employer. Non-compete clauses are generally negotiated, subject to state law, and—this is the key point—part of employer-employee contracts, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/13/business/noncompete-clauses.html?_r=0" target="_blank">even when they're arguably abused to depress wages.</a> They are not part of the usual relationship between a typical school and a typical undergraduate student; to the contrary, <a href="https://www.insidehighered.com/quicktakes/2015/07/08/more-third-college-students-transfer" target="_blank">more than a third of all college students transfer</a>, and they're not required to seek permission to speak to new institutions nor receive scholarships there. <br /><br />Imagine you're a drama major at Duke. You decide you'd rather be at Yale. Maybe you like the school's fine arts department better; maybe you're following a girlfriend or boyfriend; maybe you just really want to live in New Haven, Connecticut. When you go to the dean's office to arrange the necessary paperwork, you're told it's a no-go—your academic advisor has nixed the move, and both schools have agreed to abide by her desire. Oh, and if you want to transfer to Stanford instead, <i>maybe</i> she'll consider it. <br /><br />If all of the above sounds ridiculous, well, that's the point. It's just as ridiculous for athletes. So any potential change is welcome. That said, the Transfer Working Group's announcement likely isn't coincidental, nor coming from an enlightened, kind-hearted place. As is the case with almost every recent athlete-friendly NCAA rule change—<a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/aliciajessop/2014/04/15/the-ncaa-approves-unlimited-meals-for-division-i-athletes-after-shabazz-napier-complains-of-going-hungry-the-lesson-for-other-college-athletes/#408d91a915bd" target="_blank">unlimited meals and snacks</a>, the <a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/81801184/why-schools-suddenly-support-four-year-scholarships-for-college-athletes" target="_blank">return of guaranteed four-year scholarships</a>, the aforementioned cost-of-attendance stipends—it's almost certainly the result of bad press and ongoing legal pressure.<br /><br />As such, don't expect schools to voluntarily surrender any more power over athletes than they feel is absolutely necessary. To wit: the NCAA also is considering changes to its rules governing graduate transfers—that is, athletes who have earned their undergraduate degrees but still have eligibility remaining and want to play at another school while pursuing graduate degrees.<br /><br />Unlike undergraduate transfers, who generally have to sit out a year of athletic competition at their new schools, graduate transfers usually are allowed to play immediately. (A recent case in which <a href="https://www.si.com/college-basketball/2017/05/23/cameron-johnson-unc-pitt-kevin-stallings" target="_blank">Pitt basketball player Cameron Johnson had to publicly shame his school into allowing him to play at North Carolina</a> was a notable exception). Perhaps unsurprisingly, <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2017/06/28/ncaa-proposal-ease-path-for-transfers/437306001/" target="_blank">the Transfer Working Group is considering ways to encumber and restrict the practice</a>, both by requiring teams to count transfers against their scholarship limits for two years, regardless of whether the player is still at the school, and penalizing coaches for recruiting potential graduate transfers.<br /><br />Again: this is ridiculous. Graduate transfers shouldn't be bogged down with extra rules and restrictions, nor see their options chilled and limited because some coach somewhere wants an extra hammer to hold over his price-fixed workforce; to the contrary, undergraduate transfers should be just as free to play immediately, the same as any walk-on student would be. Unless, of course, the NCAA wants to admit that revenue sport athletes aren't like other students, and are actually working demanding (and lucrative) campus jobs.<br /><br />If that comes to pass, then sure: draw up non-compete clauses. Draft language that forbids tampering by rival schools. Hire some contract lawyers, and stack the deck as much as you can. Just give athletes the corresponding, All-American freedom to negotiate, stack back, and receive something in return—like, say, a salary with a buyout if they decide to take their talents elsewhere. <i>Quid pro quo. </i>None of this is particularly novel, nor hard. School athletic departments already do it all the time. Just ask coaches<br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/59pzyq/the-ncaa-may-loosen-transfer-rules-that-shouldnt-even-exist"><br /><b>Read the original article at VICE Sports</b></a>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-6825577268372949512017-06-27T10:13:00.000-04:002017-07-12T10:17:47.345-04:00Next Woman Up?<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1N0LMgdhP9g/WWYvfhBOp_I/AAAAAAAADx0/XX9NUZOkrYoR1oUl13tEGbO-q9E6pgFAACLcBGAs/s1600/1498594771994-USATSI_9844400.jpg" imageanchor="1" ><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1N0LMgdhP9g/WWYvfhBOp_I/AAAAAAAADx0/XX9NUZOkrYoR1oUl13tEGbO-q9E6pgFAACLcBGAs/s1600/1498594771994-USATSI_9844400.jpg" data-original-width="1600" data-original-height="899" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Does a new girls' high school football Title IX lawsuit asks the wrong question?</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | June 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">S</span>hould high schools offer girls' tackle football? That's the question at the heart of a Title IX lawsuit filed last week by a group of female youth players in Utah who want their local school districts to offer the sport.<br /><br />Given what we know about football's effects on the human brain, however, I'm not sure that's the question schools should be asking.<br /><br />First, the suit. <a href="https://sports.yahoo.com/sam-gordon-remember-files-lawsuit-make-girls-high-school-football-reality-235213870.html" target="_blank">According to Eric Adelson of <i>Yahoo! Sports</i></a>, it's largely the brainchild of Sam Gordon—whose ball-carrying exploits as a nine-year-old in a boys' tackle football league became a viral video sensation—and her father, Brent, a lawyer who subsequently helped start a four-team girls' recreational tackle league for fifth and sixth-graders in 2015. <br /><br />Sam is now 14. Perhaps unsurprisingly, she still wants to play. So do many of her teammates. Brent told <i>Yahoo! Sports</i> that when he reached out to the Utah High School Activities Association to ask about creating school-sponsored teams for girls, he was advised to keep building the rec league.<br />Hence the lawsuit. "I don't want to wait 10-15 years," Brent told <i>Yahoo! Sports.</i> "My daughter would be 30 years old by then. These girls want to play now."<br /><br />As Adelson reports, the suit's outcome will depend on a number of factors, including whether Gordon and her fellow plaintiffs can show that there's significant community interest in girls' tackle football. And from the standpoint of gender equality, it's hard not to see this case as a potentially positive development. Equal opportunity is a worthy social goal; anything that produces more opportunities for more girls to play sports is hard to argue against, particularly as America's youth seemingly become less active and more overweight with every passing year.<br /><br />And yet: we're not just talking about generic <i>sports.</i> We're talking, specifically, about tackle football. A sport that carries a significant—albeit fuzzily quantified—risk of producing brain damage, both acute and chronic.<br /><br />Adelson writes that many sports can cause concussions. This is true. But other sports generally do not involve getting hit in the head over and over and over the way tackle football does; medical and scientific research increasingly suggests that repetitive sub-concussive blows also are bad for the brain, producing a cumulative and compounding negative effect. Moreover, football's head-banging violence isn't accidental, nor something that can be eliminated with rules changes and tackling technique tweaks. It's inherent to the sport, which is less akin to hockey or soccer than boxing.<br /><br />Last year, I wrote about Russell Davis, <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/53xy8k/friday-night-lights-out-the-case-for-abolishing-high-school-football">a Las Vegas resident who was believed to be the first school board candidate in the U.S. to run on a platform of banning high school football.</a> Davis lost in the Clark County, Nevada primaries. That didn't come as a shock. His idea undoubtedly would strike many people—probably the vast majority of people who care about prep sports in the first place—as, well, crazy.<br /><br />But is it? The more I listened to Davis—and the more I dug into the topic, talking to brain trauma researchers, bioethicists, and others—the more it sounded reasonable. Even preferable. One discussion in particular, with Purdue University researcher Tom Talavage, stuck with me:<br /><div class="article__blockquote"><br /></div><blockquote class="tr_bq">In 2009, Purdue University researchers studying an Indiana prep football team found that over the course of a ten-week season, players absorbed as many as 1,855 head hits of magnitudes up to 289 Gs—that is, 289 times the force of gravity, or nearly three times as forcefully as a dummy hits the windshield in a 25-mile-per-hour car crash. They also discovered that while athletes diagnosed with concussions performed poorly on cognitive tests and showed signs of dysfunction on functional magnetic-resonance imaging (fMRI) scans of their brains—which was expected—a number of athletes who had not been diagnosed showed similar signs of impairment. "They looked just as bad or worse as the concussed kids," says Tom Talavage, a biomedical engineering professor at Purdue. "At that point, [one of my colleagues] asked if we were ready for the fact that we might have to kill football." Subsequent studies by Talavage's group and others have <a href="http://neurosciencenews.com/concussion-neurology-school-football-5614/" target="_blank">produced similar findings.</a></blockquote><br />Davis never suggested to me that youth tackle football should be banned. He's a football fan, someone who was genuinely excited about the prospect of the Oakland Raiders moving to Las Vegas. (By now, I'm guessing he has season tickets). Davis coaches his children's soccer teams; he wasn't trying to ensconce America's kids in bubble wrap. He simply looked at the available data, weighed tackle football's risks and rewards, and concluded that the sport doesn't have a place in public schools. Not when the mission of those schools is to protect and nurture young minds—as opposed to harming them—and not when taxpayer dollars are being spent to underwrite a potential public health problem.<br /><br />Maybe you agree. Maybe you don't. Most likely, you probably haven't thought about it, nor learned enough to have a truly informed opinion. That's understandable. Public debate over the brain danger of tackle football largely has been confined to the National Football League and pee-wee levels; the high school game (and college, too) has more or less flown under our collective radar. But as more studies are published and the brain becomes less of a scientific mystery, that figures to change. The risks will become less fuzzy. Sooner or later, we're all going to be grappling with the same ethical, financial, and medical concerns that prompted Davis to run for office.<br /><br />And that brings me back to Gordon's suit. Again, equality is terrific. And sports are a valuable part of what public high schools offer to their students. But at what cost? And to whom? Should schools offer tackle football to girls? I'm not sure they should offer it to anyone.<br /><br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/new8aw/girls-high-school-football-title-ix-suit-misses-the-point"><b>Read the original article at VICE Sports</b></a>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-58304129057133422892017-06-26T10:06:00.000-04:002017-07-12T10:10:36.993-04:00Gender Bore<a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3YHGe9OhFuQ/WWYtcX5sKKI/AAAAAAAADxs/QZwtlStMJMolai9WNAz1sSHLfEBVggdAQCLcBGAs/s1600/1498493674403-USATSI_9361735.jpg" imageanchor="1" ><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3YHGe9OhFuQ/WWYtcX5sKKI/AAAAAAAADxs/QZwtlStMJMolai9WNAz1sSHLfEBVggdAQCLcBGAs/s1600/1498493674403-USATSI_9361735.jpg" data-original-width="1600" data-original-height="899" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>In calling Serena Williams the "best female player ever," John McEnroe reheated a dumb debate</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | June 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">H</span>ere we ago again. Almost two decades after saying that <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/03/sports/proposal-for-battle-of-sexes.html" target="_blank">any male college or senior tour tennis player could beat Venus or Serena Williams</a>, John McEnroe is still making unfavorable—and at this point in sports and cultural history, pretty damn pointless—cross-gender comparisons involving the latter Williams sister.<br /><br />While promoting his new memoir <a href="http://www.npr.org/2017/06/25/534149646/but-seriously-tennis-great-john-mcenroe-says-hes-seeking-inner-peace" target="_blank">during a weekend interview with NPR</a>, McEnroe called Serena "the best female player ever—no question." That prompted the following exchange with host Lulu Garcia-Navarro:<br /><blockquote class="tr_bq"><b> Garcia-Navarro:</b> Some wouldn't qualify it, some would say she's the best player in the world. Why qualify it?<br /><b> McEnroe:</b> Oh! Uh, she's not, you mean, the best player in the world, period?<br /><b> Garcia-Navarro:</b> Yeah, the best tennis player in the world. You know, why say female player?<br /><b> McEnroe:</b> Well because if she was in, if she played the men's circuit she'd be like 700 in the world.<br /><b> Garcia-Navarro:</b> You think so?<br /><b> McEnroe:</b> Yeah. That doesn't mean I don't think Serena is an incredible player. I do, but the reality of what would happen would be I think something that perhaps it'd be a little higher, perhaps it'd be a little lower. And on a given day, Serena could beat some players. I believe because she's so incredibly strong mentally that she could overcome some situations where players would choke 'cause she's been in it so many times, so many situations at Wimbledon, The U.S. Open, etc. But if she had to just play the circuit—the men's circuit—that would be an entirely different story.</blockquote>A couple of things, here. First, McEnroe isn't wrong to assert that, No, Actually, Serena Williams Is Not The Absolute Best Player On A Planet Earth Where Human Males Also Play High-Level Competitive Tennis. Nor is he necessarily being sexist. Males tend to be larger and stronger than females—thanks, hormones!—and that can confer a competitive advantage in many sports, particularly head-to-head ones. <br /><br />Indeed, Williams—<a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/tennis/2015/01/17/serena-williams-sascha-bajin-australian-open/21907629/" target="_blank">who has long practiced with male hitting partners</a>, the same way many <a href="http://www.timesunion.com/tuplus-local/article/In-women-s-basketball-men-have-a-role-on-10926410.php" target="_blank">women's college basketball teams scrimmage against men</a>—pretty much agrees with McEnroe's assessment. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/early-lead/wp/2017/06/25/john-mcenroe-if-serena-williams-played-the-mens-circuit-shed-rank-like-700/?tid=pm_sports_pop&amp;utm_term=.6ee70e735c9f" target="_blank">As noted by the <i>Washington Post</i></a>, she told David Letterman four years ago that "men's tennis and women's tennis are completely, almost, two separate sports. If I were to play Andy Murray, I would lose 6-0, 6-0 in five to six minutes, maybe 10 minutes. <br /><br />"No, it's true. It's a completely different sport. The men are a lot faster and they serve harder, they hit harder, it's just a different game. I love to play women's tennis. I only want to play girls, because I don't want to be embarrassed."<br /><br />This is where McEnroe is being a bit blinkered, and in a way that's all too common in sports discourse across both time and gender. It's not enough to acknowledge and appreciate an athlete's accomplishments and greatness relative to their competition, even though that's the <i>whole point of playing the games. </i>Nope. For reasons that probably have to do with the deep-seated fan desire for <i>¿quien es mas macho? </i>dick-measuring certainty—and let's be honest, it's basically men who are play-acting arias on cable television and calling into sports talk radio about this—we have to decide and declare who the best is, period.<br /><br />And that's a limited way of thinking about things. Sort of boring, too. Send LeBron James back in time, like the Terminator, and he'd likely lay waste to the 1950s-60s NBA; does that mean Bill Russell sucked or should be bumped down a few notches on the Great Imaginary Ziggurat of Hoops Awesomeness? Do we really need a Ziggurat in the first place? <i>Serena Williams can't compete with Andy Murray. </i>No fucking shit. Have you watched her play against other women? She's awesome. Arguably more dominant against them than any male player has been against his peers. Which is where the more fair—and more fun—argument lies, anyway.<br /><br />Look, it pains me a little to give credit to boxing, a sport that transforms brain damage into extra zeros in Don King's bank account, but this is one area the fight game gets exactly right. Boxing fans don't ask if Sugar Ray Leonard could knock out Mike Tyson; they compare fighters to their legitimate comparables, apples to apples, and are smart enough to embrace the concept of pound-for-pound greatness. No absolutes or periods necessary.<br /><br />The rest of us should do the same. The alternative? It's <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlfCLnxtew8" target="_blank">Jesse Owens racing horses.</a> A <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x11pvb4_ufc-2-pat-smith-quarter-final-bout_sport" target="_blank">self-proclaimed ninja getting pummeled in the second UFC</a>. Floyd Mayweather and Conor McGregor teaming up to separate a whole bunch of suckers and their money. It's McEnroe presumably trying to give a compliment, yet managing to be both condescending, petty, and frankly, pretty tired.<br /><br />Oh, and back when Donald Trump was mostly notable as a business impresario who managed to lose money owning a casino, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2000/09/03/sports/proposal-for-battle-of-sexes.html" target="_blank">it was also enough to prompt the future president to offer McEnroe and the Williams sisters $1 million for a winner-take-all match</a>. Which ought to tell you everything you need to know about this debate.<br /><br /><b><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/vbg9kb/john-mcenroe-says-serena-is-best-female-player-ever-reheats-dumb-debate" target="_blank">Read the original article at VICE Sports</a></b>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-58546193733085682812017-06-21T13:00:00.001-04:002017-06-21T13:02:49.064-04:00How a Pay-for-Play HBCU Basketball Could Disrupt The NCAA<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ppSg-3-TTJ8/WUqmDek-llI/AAAAAAAADwo/_5aBgsEPbcUBfCkWxzS5coDZV0HfeM1VgCLcBGAs/s1600/1497975337401-USATSI_9950797.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" data-original-height="899" data-original-width="1600" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-ppSg-3-TTJ8/WUqmDek-llI/AAAAAAAADwo/_5aBgsEPbcUBfCkWxzS5coDZV0HfeM1VgCLcBGAs/s1600/1497975337401-USATSI_9950797.jpg" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>The multibillion-dollar college sports industry exploits African-American athletes and has left historically black schools behind. Some people think there's a better way.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | June 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">W</span>hat if I told you there was a way to pay men's college basketball players a fairer portion of the hundreds of millions of dollars they generate, boost the flagging fortunes of the nation's historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), <i> and </i>stick it to the sanctimonious, self-serving quasi-monopolists at the NCAA? <br /><br />If all of that sounds too good to be true, then you haven't yet heard from Andy Schwarz. A San Francisco–based antitrust economist, <a href="http://sportsgeekonomics.tumblr.com/" target="_blank">longtime critic of college sports amateurism</a>, and—full disclosure—occasional <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/contributor/andy-schwarz">contributor to VICE Sports</a>, Schwarz has a plan to make it happen. <a href="http://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxM4wdtZ5uI-Q2FIWkZhRkx2d1E/view" target="_blank">It's a business plan</a>, in fact, and while it's still in its early stages, it works, in a nutshell, like this:<br /><br />Step 1: Form an HBCU-exclusive basketball league.<br /><br />Step 2: Tell the NCAA to pound sand, and pay the nation's very best high school and college basketball players to be part of it.<br /><br />Step 3: Profit. Oh, and also change the face of big-time campus athletics forever.<br /><br />"One of the ways to bust up a monopoly is through disruption," Schwarz says. "That's the idea here."<br /><br />The way Schwarz and his HBCU league co-founders—Ohio–based sports and entertainment attorney Richard Volante and Washington, D.C.–based author and historian Bijan Bayne—see it, the NCAA is a bit like a traditional taxi company, while their concept is akin to Uber or Lyft. The league would consist of at least 16 members drawn from the four current NCAA Division I and II HBCU conferences, institutions such as Howard University and Florida A&amp;M; its athletes would be full-time students.<br /><br />They also would be paid to play basketball, between $50,000 and $100,000 a year. Moreover, they would be allowed to endorse products, sell autographs, sign with agents, accept gifts from boosters, declare for the NBA draft, and even be drafted by NBA teams without losing their eligibility.<br />NCAA amateurism rules prohibit all of the above, generally limiting athlete compensation for playing sports to the value of an athletic scholarship: room, board, tuition, and in some cases a small cost-of-attendance stipend. Recently, University of Central Florida kicker Donald De La Haye said that his popular YouTube videos, which depict his daily life as a college athlete and have earned him income, <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/student-athlete-prevented-from-being-student-because-hes-an-athlete">may violate those rules and cost him his eligibility</a>. <br /><br />In the HBCU league, Schwarz says, athletes like De La Haye would be encouraged to market themselves.<br /><br />"There's no amateurism," he says. "If we're in a high school recruit's living room, our pitch is that we want to give you a contract for $75,000, with workers' comp, health insurance, and a 401(k). There are opportunities for ancillary revenue on top of that. We offer great campuses and alumni networks. We invite NBA teams to come, and to draft you while you're still in school. If and when you make that jump, we are thrilled for you. <br /><br />"We walk through that menu, and then we ask, 'If you're thinking of going to a school outside of our league, ask them if those same possibilities are there.'"<br /><hr /><div class="article__text--dropcap">The idea was born out of Schwarz, Volante, and Bayne's frustration with the multibillion-dollar college sports industry, in which NCAA member schools agree not to pay athletes instead of competing and bidding for their services in a free market the way every other industry works, and the way campus athletics work if you're a coach or athletic director. </div><br />It also stems from the failure of recent legal challenges to amateurism. A class-action lawsuit brought against the NCAA by former University of California, Los Angeles basketball star Ed O'Bannon over the use of athletes' names, images, and likenesses ended with federal judges finding that the association violates antitrust law, but also ruling that the NCAA can continue to prohibit player pay. <br /><br />Similarly, when a National Labor Relations Board regional director found that Northwestern University football players qualified as school employees under federal labor law and had the right to unionize, the NLRB's national office declined to exercise jurisdiction over the university's appeal of the decision, effectively leaving the unionization effort in limbo.<br /><br />The two rulings left Schwarz, who consulted for the plaintiffs on the O'Bannon case, "depressed." But he also perceived an economic opportunity. Cartels like the NCAA form because all members agree they can make more money by colluding with one another than by competing. They break up when some members decide they're getting the short end of the stick and would be better off going head-to-head with their former partners.<br /><br />"If you want to disrupt a cartel," Schwarz says, "you need to find someone inside it who is not winning."<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975012396-USATSI_9950487.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Do HBCUs really benefit by being part of the NCAA cartel? Photo by Bob Donnan-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"> <source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975012396-USATSI_9950487.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975012396-USATSI_9950487.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975012396-USATSI_9950487.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975012396-USATSI_9950487.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975012396-USATSI_9950487.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975012396-USATSI_9950487.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975012396-USATSI_9950487.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975012396-USATSI_9950487.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> <source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975012396-USATSI_9950487.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975012396-USATSI_9950487.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> </picture> <br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>Enter HBCUs. Once upon a time, schools like Grambling State were sports powerhouses. Widespread racial segregation meant that many of the best African-American athletes, like basketball's Earl "The Pearl" Monroe, starred for black institutions. In the 1970s, Grambling's football team played on national television every week, was viewed by fans as the "black Notre Dame," and had more former players in the NFL than any other school.<br /><br />"In early September, <i> Wide World of Sports</i> would air a game called the Whitney Young Classic between Grambling and Morgan State [another HBCU] at Yankee Stadium," says J. Kenyatta Cavil, a professor at Texas Southern University and an expert on HBCU athletics. "They would air it with the same gravity as a University of Southern California–Notre Dame game."<br /><br />Desegregation has since drained the HBCU athletic talent pool. Over time, schools like Morgan State and Florida A&amp;M have <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/should-grambling-state-southern-hbcus-drop-division-i-football">fallen further and further behind bigger and richer primarily white institutions</a> (PWIs), and in particular the members of the NCAA's Power Five conferences.<br /><br />Four years ago, Grambling State's football team <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/swac/2013/10/21/grambling-players-provide-shocking-details-former-coach-swayed-them-back-out-of-protest/3144353/" target="_blank">went on strike</a> to protest dangerous, dilapidated athletic facilities; in 2010, Mississippi Valley State's football stadium was <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2014/05/26/money-woes-declining-talent-plague-hbcu-football/9597123/" target="_blank">deemed so unsafe it was temporarily closed</a>. On the field, the disparities between HBCUs and other Division I programs can best be seen during "guarantee games"—that is, when HBCU teams play road games against major programs and get throttled in exchange for cash. <br /><br />In 2013, <a href="http://www.cleveland.com/osu/2013/09/why_was_this_game_played_ohio.html" target="_blank">Florida A&amp;M lost at Ohio State 76-0</a> but collected $900,000, over half of the school's $1.6 million football budget that season. Basketball isn't much different: <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/mississippi-valley-state-is-playing-14-straight-road-games-because-it-cant-afford-not-to">Mississippi Valley State went on a 14-game, 13-state road trip</a> to start its 2015-16 season, losing all 14 games while earning $600,000.<br /><br />"The HBCUs don't have a choice," says Fritz Polite, assistant dean of student affairs at Shenandoah University and a sports management expert. "They have to find some type of alternative method to raise money. The model the NCAA has in place doesn't meet their needs at all. The rich are getting richer."<br /><br />While major college sports are an estimated $10 billion-a-year industry, HBCUs see little of that money. <a href="http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/17447429/power-5-conference-schools-made-6-billion-last-year-gap-haves-nots-grows" target="_blank">An ESPN analysis</a> last year found that Power Five schools made $6 billion in 2014-15, while the Group of Five mid-major conferences accounted for another $2 billion. The total combined revenues for the Mid-Eastern and Southwestern Athletic Conferences that year, <a href="http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/finances/" target="_blank">according to a <i> USA Today </i>database</a>, were roughly $289 million—a competitive amount when compared to other small-time Division I football conferences, but a pittance compared to the big-time bowl-eligible ones.<br /><br />The lack of funding makes it harder for HBCU athletic programs to keep up in the classroom, too. In an attempt to measure educational quality, the NCAA uses a metric called Academic Progress Rate (APR), which is rooted in athletes' course completion and grade point average. Two seasons ago, all 23 teams punished with postseason ineligibility by the NCAA due to low APR scores were from HBCUs.<br /><br /><a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/hbcus-struggle-with-apr-standards-but-some-say-ncaa-measure-fails-them/2015/07/07/30d88b62-20de-11e5-bf41-c23f5d3face1_story.html?utm_term=.b6ffc5323d7f" target="_blank">A 2015 <i> Washington Post</i> story</a> explored how the NCAA system leaves HBCUs stuck between what Polite calls "a rock and a hard place." On one hand, the schools have a historical mission to educate the poorest and least academically prepared students, including athletes; on the other, they have scant resources to do so. As the <i> Post </i>put it:<br /><div class="article__blockquote"><i><br /></i> <br /><blockquote class="tr_bq"><i> HBCUs typically can't afford for their athletes to attend summer classes. They have far fewer academic advisers to provide oversight. Unlike power conference schools, HBCUs can't afford enough NCAA compliance officers to effectively navigate waivers for exemptions, or offer guaranteed scholarships that allow athletes who leave school early to return to get their degrees and boost a slumping score.</i><i><br /></i><i> Howard has two full-time academic advisers for approximately 350 athletes. At Morgan State, the only academic adviser listed on the athletic department's online staff directory is also an assistant cheerleading coach. But schools in the power five conferences often have an academic counselor devoted to football and men's basketball and one for every three to four of the institution's other sports.</i></blockquote></div><br />The NCAA's Accelerating Academic Success Program offers "resource-limited" schools grants of <a href="https://theundefeated.com/features/hbcus-unfairly-penalized-by-ncaa-academic-and-graduation-standards/" target="_blank">up to $900,000 over three-year periods to fund academic support for athletes</a>. But Polite says that when he and other members of the academic and athletic community wrote a joint letter to the association in 2012 urging changes to the APR process and greater redistribution of money away from Power Five schools and toward HBCUs and other have-nots, the NCAA <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/ncaa-apr-punishes-hbcus-more-than-it-promotes-education">"didn't take any of our recommendations and they never invited us back."</a><br /><br />"If you sat the [HBCU] presidents down and asked them truthfully, a lot of them would say the system is not benefiting them," Cavil says. "But I think they don't see any better options."<br /><hr /><div class="article__text--dropcap">Schwarz and his partners believe they can provide one. A basketball league featuring the nation's top collegiate talent—the future NBA players who currently attend schools like Duke University and the University of Kentucky—could provide a much-needed shot in the arm to HBCU athletics as a whole. It also could benefit member schools in general through what some economists have called "<a href="http://www.seattlepi.com/sports/article/Flutie-Effect-is-real-study-shows-1268039.php" target="_blank">the Flutie Effect</a>," in which high-profile athletic success spurs a virtuous, school-lifting cycle of better branding, improved alumni giving, increased and more selective enrollment, and more overall excitement.</div><br />"There's nothing that George Mason could have done in American society that is equivalent to the buzz it got from its run [to the Final Four in 2006]," says Bayne, the author and league co-founder. "No website, no brochure, no famous alum. I've worked at places where people filling out their NCAA tournament brackets had Coppin State or Hampton as a No. 15 or 16 seed and didn't know what those schools were. So the hope is that in the long run, the entire student body [of the HBCUs] will benefit in indirect ways."<br /><br />Schwarz says the proposed league also would dovetail with the HBCU mission to serve and support the African-American community. Currently, amateurism in major college sports functions as <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports">a de facto racial wealth transfer, redistributing what I estimate to be $2.2 billion annually</a> from black football and men's basketball players to predominantly white administrators, coaches, and non-revenue sport athletes. Permitting athlete pay would begin to balance the ledger. <br /><br />"And if this league takes off, this is an opportunity for people to be general managers, to work at all different levels of a sports enterprise," Schwarz says. "So it's not just black coaches being involved, it's a lot of staffing in a league that's based within the HBCU community and doesn't have the impediments we sometimes see to African-Americans getting those jobs. <br /><br />"It's not that you'll have to be black to work in the league, it's just that you won't have to be white."<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975724965-USATSI_10106024_168380978_lowres.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The proposed HBCU league is looking for socially conscious investors. Photo by Cary Edmondson-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"> <source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975724965-USATSI_10106024_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975724965-USATSI_10106024_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975724965-USATSI_10106024_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975724965-USATSI_10106024_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975724965-USATSI_10106024_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975724965-USATSI_10106024_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975724965-USATSI_10106024_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975724965-USATSI_10106024_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> <source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975724965-USATSI_10106024_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975724965-USATSI_10106024_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> </picture> <br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>It won't be cheap. League co-founder and attorney Volante estimates a total start-up cost of between $30 million and $50 million—roughly $10 to $15 million for player salaries, a similar amount to renovate facilities, and maybe half that amount to hire "high-end coaches who can recruit high-end talent."<br /><br />To fund that, Schwarz and Volante say, the league will require sponsors as well as private investors. For the former, Schwarz envisions athletic shoe and apparel companies, which already spend millions outfitting athletic departments in order to put their logos on college athletes.<br /><br />"Imagine it's Adidas," he says. "They probably have their eyes on someone who is going to be a one-and-done NCAA player two years from now. They might say to him, 'If you go to Kentucky, we can't talk to you commercially until they say you've left for the NBA. But if you go to Prairie View A&amp;M in our league, we can pay you tomorrow to be in our stuff.'"<br /><br />Their ideal investor, meanwhile, would have deep pockets, a love of sports, and a desire to effect larger social change. Maybe someone like retired NBA star and television commentator Charles Barkley, <a href="https://theundefeated.com/features/charles-barkley-is-donating-2-million-to-two-hbcus/" target="_blank">who last year donated $2 million to a pair of HBCUs</a>. Or perhaps current NBA star LeBron James, who <a href="https://theundefeated.com/features/lebron-james-donates-2-5-million-to-national-museum-of-african-american-history-and-culture/" target="_blank">recently gave $2.5 million</a> to the National Museum of African-American History and Culture. "We're looking for people who have an interest in bettering the lives of minorities and others who haven't had a voice in college athletes," Volante says.<br /><br />The league also will have to land a broadcast deal. That could mean a traditional cable network like ESPN or FOX Sports, or a digital programming provider such as Netflix or Twitter. <br /><br />"We don't want to reinvent the wheel," Volante says. "Historically, most leagues' success has been driven by their broadcast deals. Day one, we're not competing with the NCAA's billion-dollar broadcast agreement. Major League Soccer and mixed martial arts started off in the $5-to-$10 million range. If we can recruit talent, we think it's possible to get a higher value than that."<br /><br />Beyond money, Schwarz believes, the biggest obstacle to making the league a reality may be getting buy-in from the schools themselves. Ongoing state budget cuts to higher education have hit traditionally underfunded public HBCUs particularly hard, and those same institutions generally don't have much clout in state legislatures when compared to larger PWIs. <br /><br />Suppose North Carolina A&amp;T joins a pay-for-play HBCU basketball league. And suppose the school begins beating out the University of North Carolina and North Carolina State for top-tier recruits. How will powerful, politically connected Tar Heels and Wolfpack alumni and fans react? <br /><br />"It would be difficult for a president at a public [HBCU] to think about trying this out without considering that they might have some backlash," says Cavil. "The larger state schools enjoy a great deal of benefit from being aligned with the status quo. Millions and millions of dollars. They have a lot of sway in terms of NCAA legislation, and state and federal legislation to support what they think is important.<br /><br />"So now you're talking about smaller entities which presidents often put in place by legislatures or governors going back up against the same legislative machine? That's going out on a limb, and going up against vested interests. People won't look at this in terms of equality. They will look at it in terms of what they're losing."<br /><hr /><div class="article__text--dropcap">For now, the league is just a concept, <a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BxM4wdtZ5uI-Q2FIWkZhRkx2d1E/view" target="_blank">a 22-page outline that anyone can read online</a>. Cash, schools, and athletes are the essential elements, but it also needs lawyers, marketers, operations staff, an entire professional infrastructure. More of everything. </div><br />Schwarz and company would like to recruit a team of HBCU business school students to build out the plan as part of a master's degree project; they'd love to get NBA Players Association involved, as well as current and retired professional players. They're currently putting out feelers with HBCU decision-makers and attempting to meet with a school president. In December, they plan to make the rounds at the Celebration Bowl in Atlanta, which pits the MEAC and SWAC champions against each other and is essentially black college football's national championship. <br /><br />"Everybody is there, and our goal is to find people to be in charge of the project and get it over the finish line," Schwarz says. "There are people who can make this happen way better than I can. It's like how Ray Kroc stole the McDonald's idea. We are actively seeking a Ray Kroc."<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975591484-1.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A page from the HBCU league business plan. Courtesy Andy Schwarz</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"> <source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975591484-1.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975591484-1.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975591484-1.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975591484-1.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source> <source media="(min-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497975591484-1.jpeg?resize=814:*"></source> </picture> <br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>Schwarz expects wariness, at least initially. "I look like a white guy from California who wants to use black people to make a point," he says with a laugh. "I would be skeptical of me, too." But he strongly believes the league can work as an actual business, and not just as a thought exercise. Football requires large rosters and expensive infrastructure. Basketball has a lower cost of entry.<br /><br />"You only need, say, two or three high-end talents per school to make a league competitive and watchable, keep fans around, and build something," Volante says. The market for high-quality college basketball is already proven, and HBCUs would hardly be starting from scratch in terms of branding and fan interest—Bayne points to the annual Central Intercollegiate Athletic Association basketball tournament in Charlotte, which had <a href="http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/article105149121.html" target="_blank">an estimated economic impact of $55 million in 2015</a>, as a indication of what's possible. "That awareness can easily be translated to television and other viewing platforms," he says.<br /><br />Most important, Schwarz says, a pay-for-play HBCU league will have a unique advantage over the NCAA, one that previous upstart sports operations such as the United States Football League have lacked. "The easiest competitive response by a normal incumbent would be to bury us in a salary war," he says. "As a high-schooler, I was a season-ticket holder for the [USFL's] Boston Breakers. That league got Steve Young, Herschel Walker, Doug Flutie, and then they went out of business. So long as the NCAA refuses to outbid us for talent, it will have both hands tied behind its back." <br /><br />When Schwarz and company use the term "disruption," this is what they really mean: transforming the association's strength into a weakness, and turning the exploitative Hobson's choice currently presented to college athletes—amateurism or nothing—into a real one. "You don't just have to be a high school All-American," Polite says. "Imagine you're playing at Georgetown. There's Howard right across the city [in Washington, D.C.], and those guys are getting paid.<br /><br />"What would keep you where you are? You'd be like, 'The hell with this. I'm out. I'm going over there.' You could have endorsement deals, have Cadillac giving you a car, you ride around and hand out business cards for the local dealer. Every car sold, you get a cut. I'm telling you, at that point, it's over."<br /><br />Of course, there's one way NCAA schools could compete: by allowing competition, and permitting players to paid. Doing so, Volante concedes, likely would put an HBCU league out of business. But that also would be a win. "If you look at NCAA basketball and football, the majority of scholarship athletes in those sports are African-American," he says. "Right now you largely have old, white rich guys making money hand over fist off of them. If all those players start getting paid, our ultimate goal will be achieved."<br /><br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/the-plot-to-disrupt-the-ncaa-with-a-pay-for-play-hbcu-basketball-league"><b>Read the original story at VICE Sports</b></a>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-43444067398847931852017-06-16T09:14:00.004-04:002017-06-16T09:14:51.155-04:00Amateurism Isn't Educational<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-db4094YdaU4/WUPZtpKb7FI/AAAAAAAADwY/T949RNePQngsY2PR1-gAjQvD8pW0N9hOgCLcBGAs/s1600/1497285091427-Untitled_Artwork.jpg" imageanchor="1" ><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-db4094YdaU4/WUPZtpKb7FI/AAAAAAAADwY/T949RNePQngsY2PR1-gAjQvD8pW0N9hOgCLcBGAs/s1600/1497285091427-Untitled_Artwork.jpg" data-original-width="1529" data-original-height="859" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Debunking the NCAA's dumbest lie.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | June 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">B</span>y now, you've probably heard many of the National Collegiate Athletic Association's justifications for amateurism, the ancient Greek ideal of letting coaches like Nick Saban collect seven-figure salaries while limiting compensation to the athletes who do the actual on-field work in the billion-dollar economy of big-time campus sports to the value of their scholarships. <br /><br />Pay players, the NCAA warns, and the delicate competitive balance between the University of Akron and Ohio State University will implode. Athletic departments—like the one at the University of Texas, which earned $183.5 million in revenue in 2014-15—will go broke. <a href="http://deadspin.com/no-paying-ncaa-athletes-wont-cost-them-money-1792711863" target="_blank">Athletes might even have to pay income taxes</a>, and really, who wants extra cash if it means hassling with W-2 forms? And perhaps most the risible reason yet: <i> if we compensate athletes, their educations will suffer.</i><br /><br />Former United States Naval Academy player and retired NBA Hall of Famer David Robinson chuckled out loud when VICE Sports recently asked him about that last one. <br /><br />"Would getting paid [as a college basketball player] have affected my ability to study?" he said. "No. I don't think so."<br /><br />But here's the thing: the NCAA isn't joking. It's painting itself as an academic guardian, and that tactic is working, at least in federal antitrust court.<br /><br />Remember the federal class-action lawsuit brought by former University of California, Los Angeles basketball star Ed O'Bannon against the NCAA? The landmark case that sought to allow college athletes to be paid for the use of their name, images, and likenesses (or NILs) in television broadcasts and video games?<br /><br />While arguing that no, actually, people like O'Bannon should not get a bigger slice of the money pie, the NCAA's lawyers insisted that the current one-small-size-fits-all portion doled out to players somehow enhances their schooling. And believe it or not, the three-judge panel that oversaw an association appeal of the case <i> agreed</i>—at least enough to overturn an original injunction from U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken that would have permitted schools to pay players at least $5,000 a year in deferred cash. Instead, the panel decreed that <i> all </i>college athlete compensation must be tethered to educational expenses.<br /><br />There's more. The same tether could apply to <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/other/2016/08/05/ncaa-suit-shawne-alston-martin-jenkins-kessler-berman-nigel-hayes-claudia-wilken/88313408/" target="_blank">a pending class-action suit</a> brought against the NCAA and the major college conferences by former Clemson University football player Martin Jenkins, a case that essentially seeks to bring free agency to campus sports. Which means that the ludicrous logic of "if we write them checks, they won't study" could end up acting as a legal firewall that prevents college players from <i> ever</i> being paid.<br /><br />"It's insane," says David Grenardo, a 40-year-old attorney and associate professor at St. Mary's School of Law in San Antonio, Texas, who played football at Rice University in the 1990s. "What the NCAA has done is a great job of marketing and propaganda to say that amateurism is all about education."<br /><hr /><div class="article__text--dropcap">College sports have a long history of making the basic claim that amateurism and education are intrinsically linked. In 1953, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that injured University of Denver football player Ernest Nemeth was eligible to receive workers' compensation. Petrified of the financial ramifications, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/14/opinion/the-obannon-ruling-student-athlete-is-history.html" target="_blank">the NCAA created the term "student-athlete,"</a> a signal to courts and the public alike that Nemeth and his peers were simply young scholars who happened to be very good at sports—think undergrads tossing a frisbee on the quad, only with 50,000 paying spectators—and not de-facto school employees entitled to pay and legal protections.</div><br />Little has changed in the 60 years since. During the O'Bannon case, NCAA lawyers argued that amateurism rules "focus [athletes] on spending their time doing what students do, rather than trying to make as much money as possible, which is what professionals do." While testifying, University of South Carolina president Harris Pastides said that paying players would create a "wedge" between them and their classmates, and make uncompensated, non-revenue-sport athletes feel "worse about themselves." NCAA president Mark Emmert, meanwhile, fretted that if an "athlete was being paid and it changed significantly their lifestyle, they probably would not be living in a residence hall. They probably would not be eating in the cafeteria, they probably would not be as—as active a member or participant in the life of a campus."<br /><br />Translation? <i> If we pay them, they won't hang out on the quad. </i>The. Horror.<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Mark Emmert and Harris Pastides " src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496264393183-USATSI_9221448_168380978_lowres.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Mark Emmert (left) and Harris Pastides are deeply worried about where paid college athletes might choose to eat. Photo by Bob Donnan-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"> <source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496264393183-USATSI_9221448_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496264393183-USATSI_9221448_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496264393183-USATSI_9221448_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496264393183-USATSI_9221448_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496264393183-USATSI_9221448_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496264393183-USATSI_9221448_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496264393183-USATSI_9221448_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496264393183-USATSI_9221448_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> <source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496264393183-USATSI_9221448_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496264393183-USATSI_9221448_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> </picture> <br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div><br />In an <a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2756611" target="_blank"> <i>Oregon Law Review</i> </a> article—and over the phone, too—Grenardo picks apart the NCAA's argument connecting a lack of compensation and enhanced academics. Exhibit A? His own experience at Rice.<br /><br />Coming out of high school, Grenardo could have gone to Harvard University, but he chose Rice because he had dreams of playing in the NFL, and the Houston-based school then played in the Southwestern Conference alongside powerhouse programs like the University of Texas.<br />During Grenardo's junior season, he won the top student-athlete award for football; that same year, he struggled to make ends meet. Every month, he received a $385 check from Rice to cover his expenses, including a $300 share of the rent for an apartment he lived in with two other athletes. "It was supposed to pay for utilities, gas, and lunches," he says. "That never made it."<br /><br />Being paid to play football, Grenardo says, wouldn't have made him study less or spend extra time on the sport, but it would have made his life as a student easier. "I would have had money to go to a movie or buy food," he says.<br /><br /><a href="http://cew.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/Working-Learners-Report.pdf" target="_blank">According to a report</a> from Georgetown University's Center on Education and the Workforce, between 70 and 80 percent of college students are active in the labor market. Roughly 40 percent of undergraduates work at least 30 hours a week, while 25 percent of all students enrolled on a full-time basis also work full time. Some of those employees—a cohort that once included yours truly, who worked at the Georgetown bookstore—even get paid for campus jobs.<br /><br />The NCAA's member schools don't prohibit any of those students from making money. Because that would be utterly ridiculous. Why, Grenardo asks, are athletes treated differently? Because they're especially good at catching footballs?<br /><br />During the O'Bannon trial, Stanford University athletic director and amateurism advocate Bernard Muir was questioned by players' attorney Renae Steiner about computer-science students at his school earning income from software they developed in class, a pretty fair analogue for playing revenue sports. It did not go well:<br /><div class="article__blockquote"><i><br /></i></div><div class="article__blockquote"><i> Steiner: "Are you aware that some of those students at Stanford were making $3,000 a day on their apps?" </i></div><div class="article__blockquote"><i><br /></i></div><div class="article__blockquote"><i> Muir: "[I] was not aware of that." </i></div><div class="article__blockquote"><i><br /></i></div><div class="article__blockquote"><i> Steiner: "And they were making more than the professor teaching them in that class?" </i></div><div class="article__blockquote"><i><br /></i></div><div class="article__blockquote"><i> Muir: "Okay. I will take your word for it." </i></div><div class="article__blockquote"><i><br /></i></div><div class="article__blockquote"><i> Steiner: "Okay. Do you know if those students are no longer integrated into the academic community at Stanford?" </i></div><div class="article__blockquote"><i><br /></i></div><div class="article__blockquote"><i> Muir: "I would assume that they are."</i></div><br />"It's crazy, the idea that if we put $20,000, $30,000, $40,000 into the pockets of these athletes who don't have a lot of money, who knows what they will do with it," Grenardo says. "Even at my law school, some of my students have better cars than me. Nobody says about kids who are affluent, 'Oh my God, we need to rein this in.'"<br /><br />Last year, Emmert took his employer's logic to its dopiest possible conclusion and claimed that paying college athletes would make them <a href="http://www.businessreport.com/politics/interview-ncaa-president-mark-emmert" target="_blank">no longer students at all</a>, presumably because simultaneously (a) playing campus sports, (b) being paid for playing that sport, and (c) being a college student would require a heretofore unknown quantum state. <br /><br />Except: former University of Michigan basketball player Juwan Howard finished his undergraduate degree during his rookie year with the Washington Bullets, the same year he earned $1.31 million playing basketball. Likewise, former University of North Carolina basketball player Antawn Jamison (career earnings: $142.5 million) completed his degree while playing in the NBA. So did former UNC players Vince Carter ($169.6 million) and Jerry Stackhouse ($84.5 million), former Colgate University player Adonal Foyle ($63.4 million), and former Georgetown player Jeff Green ($50.3 million).<br /><br />Or take John Urschel. As an offensive lineman for the Baltimore Ravens, he made $726,000 last season—and as a student at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, he's currently pursuing a doctorate in applied mathematics.<br /><br />Urschel previously played football at Penn State University, where he earned bachelor's and master's degrees, taught undergraduate math courses, and never missed a game. On Saturday nights, he recalls, he would retreat to his office in the school's math building, the better to catch up on his homework. "My friends would come by and try to bring me out, and it would be 1 AM," Urschel says. "I would always swoop in for last call [at bars]. <br /><br />"I loved my college experience, but it was a grind. What I have to do with MIT and the NFL is much easier than what I had to do in college in terms of time."<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="John Urschel" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497400116790-john-urschel.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">John Urschel, courageously overcoming NFL paychecks to pursue a doctorate at MIT. Photo by Kyle Terada-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"><source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497400116790-john-urschel.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497400116790-john-urschel.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497400116790-john-urschel.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497400116790-john-urschel.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497400116790-john-urschel.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497400116790-john-urschel.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497400116790-john-urschel.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497400116790-john-urschel.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source><source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497400116790-john-urschel.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1497400116790-john-urschel.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source></picture> <br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div><br />Hold up. By the NCAA's reasoning, Penn State should have been easier—because <a href="http://www.houstonchronicle.com/sports/college/article/Bilas-Luck-disagree-on-free-market-pay-for-6580621.php" target="_blank">as NCAA vice president Oliver Luck has said</a>, paychecks and the "opportunity to do an autograph signing, or an endorsement, really distracts that young person from what's really important, which is the educational component."<br /><br />Isn't that right, John Urschel?<br /><br />"It's not even—"<br /><br />Urschel pauses. At MIT, he's focusing on numerical linear algebra, machine learning, and spectral graph theory, whatever the heck that is. Nevertheless, right now he sounds stumped.<br /><br />"I'm not sure how to—"<br /><br />Another, longer pause.<br /><br />"No," Urschel says. "I don't believe so. But it feels like a ridiculous question to me, to be perfectly honest."<br /><hr /><div class="article__text--dropcap">Speaking of ridiculous, <a href="http://www.ncaa.org/amateurism" target="_blank">on its website</a> the NCAA says that "maintaining amateurism is crucial to preserving an academic environment in which acquiring a quality education is the first priority." Great. If that's true, then college sports should be relatively free of academic compromise and malfeasance. </div><br />After all, they're already amateur.<br /><br />Except: <a href="http://csri-sc.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/2014-FOOTBALL-AGG-REPORT_10-7-14.pdf" target="_blank">a 2014 report from South Carolina's College Sports Research Institute</a> found that the graduation rate of football players in the Power Five conferences was 20 percent lower than that of their non-athlete counterparts; <a href="http://csri-sc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/2013-14_MBB-WBB_AGG-Report_3-12-14.pdf" target="_blank">for men's basketball players</a>, the graduation rate in major conferences was 31.5 percent lower. <br /><br />Three years ago, <a href="http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/ncaa-investigating-academic-fraud-at-20-schools-per-report" target="_blank">the NCAA reportedly was investigating 20 cases of academic fraud</a> at its member schools, 18 of them at Division I institutions. One of those schools, the University of North Carolina, was placed on academic probation by its accreditation body—the first Tier 1 research university to receive such a penalty. UNC remains <a href="http://carolinacommitment.unc.edu/files/2014/10/UNC-FINAL-REPORT.pdf" target="_blank">under NCAA investigation</a> for a massive scandal in which hundreds of athletes over a 23-year period were steered toward bogus "paper classes" that never met and required students to produce single, end-of-semester papers, which often were plagiarized or allegedly written by others and sometimes graded by non-faculty members.<br /><br />None of this is new. When former North Carolina athletes Rashanda McCants and Devon Ramsay sued the school and the NCAA in 2015 over the paper classes scandal, their 100-page complaint cited 26 different examples of academic malfeasance at schools ranging from the University of Michigan to Texas Tech University. Among the cases was a University of Georgia class taught by an assistant basketball coach in which several of his players received A's despite rarely attending—and were given a final exam that included the question <a href="http://www.redandblack.com/news/jim-harrick-jr-s-final-exam/article_f96e462b-0562-5da0-85f7-dbfac20ed8e9.html" target="_blank">"How many goals are on a basketball court?"</a><br /><br />While researching <i> Billion-Dollar Ball</i>, <a href="http://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/vice-sports-qa-billion-dollar-ball-author-gil-gaul">his book on big-time college football</a>, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Gil Gaul spent a morning walking around the University of Kansas' 1,000-acre campus with "class checkers" (an athletic department official called them "varsity ambassadors") who stood outside classroom doors and had revenue-sport athletes sign sheets of paper confirming when they entered and exited their classes.<br /><br />Sure sounds like an environment where preventing athletes from being paid is ensuring that quality educations are the first priority, doesn't it?<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265108242-USATSI_9922670_168380978_lowres.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Pay players like coaches, and academics will be imperiled. Photo by Bob Donnan-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"> <source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265108242-USATSI_9922670_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265108242-USATSI_9922670_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265108242-USATSI_9922670_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265108242-USATSI_9922670_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265108242-USATSI_9922670_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265108242-USATSI_9922670_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265108242-USATSI_9922670_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265108242-USATSI_9922670_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> <source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265108242-USATSI_9922670_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265108242-USATSI_9922670_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> </picture> <br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>There are real reasons why players struggle academically, and they have nothing to do with money. When a regional director of the National Labor Relations Board ruled in 2014 that football players at Northwestern University qualified as school employees under federal labor law, he did so partially because they spent 40 to 50 hours a week on their sport during the season and up to 25 hours a week during the spring semester, compared to 20 hours a week on academics. <br /><br />That wasn't an anomaly: in <a href="https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/DI_GOALS_FARA_final_1.pdf" target="_blank">a 2011 survey by the NCAA</a>, athletes in big-time football and basketball programs reported that they spent, on average, more than 40 hours a week on sports and about 38 hours on school; a recent Pac-12 survey found that athletes in the conference spent an average of 50 hours a week on their sports, and often were <a href="http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/pac-12-study-reveals-athletes-too-exhausted-to-study-effectively/" target="_blank">"too exhausted to study effectively."</a><br /><br />Grenardo graduated from Rice with degrees in political science and policy studies, and earned a 3.57 grade-point average. "But I could have done much better without football," he says. The sport was a grind: training camp double sessions in Houston's 100-degree, 90 percent humidity heat; road games that began with Friday afternoon walkthroughs in the opponent's stadium and ended when the team returned to campus late Saturday night or early Sunday morning; daily afternoon practices that made taking classes after 2:00 PM impossible, and almost always included a blocking drill that saw Grenardo and his fellow defensive backs spend ten minutes head-ramming each other. <br /><br />"Usually, by the end of every day my head and body were so worn out that I didn't have the ability to think straight," he says. "I would do all my homework on Sundays, just a mad dash to catch up.<br /><br />"When I got to law school, my first day of class ended at like, three or four in the afternoon. I literally felt like I was on vacation. You mean I can go to class, and afterward, I can just study? It was strange to me."<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265189533-Grenardo.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Law professor and former Rice football player David Grenardo. Courtesy David Grenardo</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"> <source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265189533-Grenardo.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265189533-Grenardo.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265189533-Grenardo.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265189533-Grenardo.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265189533-Grenardo.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265189533-Grenardo.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265189533-Grenardo.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265189533-Grenardo.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> <source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265189533-Grenardo.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265189533-Grenardo.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> </picture> <br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>The desire to win—which, again, is unrelated to player pay—also leads schools to admit talented athletes who are woefully unprepared for college. A <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/07/us/ncaa-athletes-reading-scores/" target="_blank">2014 CNN analysis</a> of the SAT and ACT entrance exam scores of football and basketball players at 21 NCAA schools found that between 7 and 18 percent were reading at an elementary-school level. Those numbers are lower than what former North Carolina learning specialist turned whistleblower Mary Willingham said she found when she studied 183 football and basketball players who attended the school from 2004 to 2012: 60 percent read between fourth- and eighth-grade levels, while about 10 percent read below a third-grade level. (In a UNC-commissioned review of Willingham's claims, <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/11/us/ncaa-athletes-unc-whistleblower/" target="_blank">three independent adult literacy experts concluded</a> that the specific test underlying her claims was not a good measure of reading levels and that she may have misread the findings and inaccurately assigned a grade level to the scores).<br /><br />That doesn't surprise University of Oklahoma professor Gerry Gurney. Over the last 31 years, he has worked in academic support for athletes at four major schools—Oklahoma, Iowa State University, Southern Methodist University, and the University of Maryland—and served as the president of both the National Association of Academic Advisors for Athletics and the Drake Group, a national advocacy origination of academics whose mission is to protect academic integrity within campus sports.<br /><br />Shortly after starting his first academic counseling job at Iowa State, Gurney noticed something odd about the school's football and men's basketball players: "None of them were reading." Puzzled, he gave the athletes reading tests. "I found that 95 percent of them were reading below the tenth-grade level, which is the level at which college textbooks are aimed," Gurney says. Ten percent were functionally illiterate.<br /><br />"The admission of unprepared students is the original sin in big-time sports," he says. "We know damn well—and college presidents know damn well—that schools are admitting athletes to competitive institutions that have no business being successful students there."<br /><br />Gurney created a remedial education program at Iowa State <a href="http://www.si.com/vault/1983/05/23/626882/scorecard" target="_blank">and saw some success.</a> But too many universities, he says, refuse to be honest about what truly hurts athletes' educations. Instead, they funnel time-strapped, unprepared young men into what he and others have dubbed an "eligibility curriculum"—a campus-by-campus patchwork of undemanding courses, friendly professors, overly helpful tutors, lavish study halls, and substance-free majors that keeps athletes eligible to play under NCAA academic standards, while leaving them with substandard educations and Potemkin degrees.<br />None of this is the result of some quarterback somewhere getting a cash handshake from a friendly booster.<br /><br />"It's absolute lip service from the NCAA when they say they are about education," Gurney says.<br /><hr /><div class="article__text--dropcap">Does the college sports establishment even believe its own malarkey? Not entirely. University of Notre Dame president John Jenkins <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/11/sports/ncaafootball/notre-dame-president-stands-firm-amid-shifts-in-college-athletics.html" target="_blank">told the <i> New York Times</i></a> that permitting player pay would be an "Armageddon" that "does some violence to [the] educational relationship" between athletes and their schools—but school athletic director Jack Swarbrick told VICE Sports at a campus sports reform meeting in Washington, D.C., that he doesn't think there's a link between amateurism and education. The NCAA touted education as its raison d'être in the O'Bannon case, but responded to McCants and Ramsay's lawsuit over the North Carolina scandal by <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/01/sport/ncaa-response-to-lawsuit/" target="_blank">arguing in federal court</a> that it has no legal duty to make sure said education is actually delivered.</div><br />"This is the underlying lie of the NCAA," says Michael Hausfeld, the Washington, D.C.-based antitrust attorney who headed the O'Bannon case and is also the lead litigator on McCants and Ramsay's suit. "Up until we filed the North Carolina case, you had the NCAA saying they are there for the welfare of athletes as students. Now they say they have nothing to do with that. You can't be more of a hypocrite."<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="Jack Swarbrick" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265320598-USATSI_8895084_168380978_lowres.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Jack Swarbrick doesn't see a link between education and amateurism. Photo by Matt Cashore-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"> <source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265320598-USATSI_8895084_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265320598-USATSI_8895084_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265320598-USATSI_8895084_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265320598-USATSI_8895084_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265320598-USATSI_8895084_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265320598-USATSI_8895084_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265320598-USATSI_8895084_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265320598-USATSI_8895084_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> <source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265320598-USATSI_8895084_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496265320598-USATSI_8895084_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> </picture> <br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>In fact, allowing payer play could actually help athletes be better students. How so? Former NFL player Shawn Stuckey grew up poor, and told VICE Sports that one time he sold his own blood plasma to make ends meet while playing college football. "There was no NCAA prohibition on that," he said. A paycheck certainly would have helped. Likewise, more money arguably would encourage athletes like former University of Kansas basketball player Ben McLemore—who <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/big12/2013/02/27/big-12-mens-college-basketball-kansas-jayhawks-ben-mclemore/1947401/" target="_blank">loved college but jumped to the NBA after his sophomore year largely to help support his impoverished family</a>—to stay in school longer.<br /><br />NCAA schools <a href="http://deadspin.com/college-football-coaches-are-making-millions-off-a-usel-1742644295" target="_blank">already pay coaches bonuses</a> for their players' academic performance. Why, Grenardo asks, shouldn't that cash go directly to the athletes actually sitting through classes? Instead of banning player pay, why not hand out $5,000 for making the academic all-conference team, $10,000 for graduating, $20,000 for landing on the dean's list?<br /><br />"I don't want to exaggerate this as being a reason for saying [amateurism] rules should be struck down, but I certainly believe there could be some academic benefit for letting students be compensated," says Jeffrey Kessler, the lead attorney on the Jenkins case that's seeking free agency in college sports. "We have a lot of evidence that students who come from higher-income backgrounds tend to do better in school. <br /><br />"A lot of [athletes] comes from very poor backgrounds—and the extent to which they are under financial stress for themselves or their families and others, and that is relieved in some way, you maybe can focus more on your studies and your education without worrying, I don't think it would be a negative. I think it could only be a positive."<br /><br />All it would take, Grenardo says, is for the NCAA to stop pretending that it's a self-styled, tough-love parent permanently withholding players' allowances in order to make sure they do their homework—and for federal judges and everyone else to quit playing along with the association's cynical ruse.<br /><br />"If the NCAA really cared about education," he says with a laugh, "they would quit scheduling football games on every day of the week."<br /><b><br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/amateurism-isnt-educational-debunking-the-ncaas-dumbest-lie">Read the original article at VICE Sports</a></b>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-19269630892711640582017-06-08T10:13:00.001-04:002017-06-08T10:13:05.431-04:00The Sports Welfare Silver Bullet<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-riY5sgbXES8/WTlbWcvSMXI/AAAAAAAADwE/w6LJHGDezSgk71CCJn9AoHkT-vI1ii9SwCLcB/s1600/1496767358532-USATSI_9809103.jpg" imageanchor="1" ><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-riY5sgbXES8/WTlbWcvSMXI/AAAAAAAADwE/w6LJHGDezSgk71CCJn9AoHkT-vI1ii9SwCLcB/s1600/1496767358532-USATSI_9809103.jpg" data-original-width="1600" data-original-height="898" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>How a proposed federal law from 1995 could end America's hopeless addiction to spending billions of taxpayer dollars on sports stadiums.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | June 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">A</span>merica needs an intervention. And no, I'm not referring to <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-furious-and-frustrated-will-join-allies-in-attacking-comey-testimony/2017/06/06/171e6d00-4acf-11e7-9669-250d0b15f83b_story.html" target="_blank">the current occupant of the White House's media habits</a>. I'm talking about our hopeless, helpless, hapless addiction to spending taxpayer money on sports stadiums. It's the public-policy equivalent of trading a perfectly good cow for a handful of magic beans—only in this case, the giant moves to Los Angeles for a bigger, better castle while <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-sports-nfl-stadiums-insight-idUSKCN0VC0EP" target="_blank">we're stuck servicing the $144 million debt</a> on our now-useless beanstalk.<br /><br />Fortunately, I have just the idea: a 100 percent federal tax, paid for by sports teams, on all state and local spending designed to benefit them.<br /><br />Perhaps that sounds excessive. Punitive, even. <i>A hundred percent? When they set the Death Star to full power, it blew up an entire planet. </i>Only that's the point. Because when it comes to giving billionaire team owners millions of dollars that they absolutely do not need—the better to construct glorified product showrooms that they otherwise could absolutely finance on their own, the same way every other business does—we're the nation that just can't quit, forever swearing that this time, things will be different.<br /><br />Right after the next hit, of course.<br /><br />In Georgia, they're <a href="http://www.myajc.com/news/tale-two-atlanta-stadiums-political-fortunes-rise-fall-deals/y41Uyn0xhimNXt4VaDRIoO/" target="_blank">spending more than $600 million</a> on shiny new football and <a href="http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/the-braves-want-14m-more-from-cobb-county-taxpayers-for-their-new-stadium/" target="_blank">baseball stadiums</a> to replace older, less shiny football and baseball stadiums that collectively cost taxpayers over $200 million in the 1990s. In Texas, they're <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2016/10/18/rangers-stadium-cost-taxpayers-1-billion/92357198/" target="_blank">forking over an estimated $500 million (and perhaps far more)</a> for a baseball stadium with—take me <i> in</i> to the ballgame—air conditioning. In Nevada, <a href="http://deadspin.com/the-raiders-robbed-las-vegas-in-americas-worst-stadium-1795475973" target="_blank">a planned football stadium will be soaking up $750 million of subsidies</a>, the largest-ever transfer of public cash to an NFL owner's private pockets, bigger than the $619 million spent on Indianapolis' Lucas Oil Stadium in 2008.<br /><br />Even in California, spiritual home of the rehab clinic and a state where sober, right-thinking citizens said <i> thanks but no thanks</i> not <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/sports/football/san-diego-rejects-chargers-stadium.html?_r=0" target="_blank"> once</a> but <a href="https://thinkprogress.org/the-biggest-surprise-about-the-rams-relocation-to-los-angeles-it-s-actually-a-win-for-taxpayers-865635148fa5" target="_blank">twice</a> to recent NFL efforts to pickpocket public coffers, taxpayers will be on the hook for as much as $160 million in tax breaks and other costs connected to the ongoing construction of a new stadium for the Rams and the Chargers.<br /><br />According to Harvard University professor Judith Grant Long, Americans <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=CbWTGMEGymAC&amp;pg=PA37&amp;lpg=PA37&amp;dq=Public/Private+Partnerships+for+Major+League+Sports+Facilities+$12+billion&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=QN_ejqxbtN&amp;sig=jrG6akR24rREabgu9bTOyn8ZMUY&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiIuraPyKnUAhVn5YMKHarIB5IQ6AEIRzAG" target="_blank"> spent roughly $20 billion on 106 sports stadiums built between 1990 and 2010</a>. And it isn't just state and local governments picking up the tab: <a href="http://www.brookings.edu/research/why-the-federal-government-should-stop-spending-billions-on-private-sports-stadiums/" target="_blank"> according to a study from the Brookings Institution</a> last year, the federal treasury has lost $3.7 billion in revenue since 2000 because the bonds used for stadium construction are tax-exempt. Which means that even if you hate the New York Yankees and live nowhere near the Bronx, you still helped contribute a whopping $431 million subsidy to the construction of the new Yankee Stadium.<br /><br />Sports stadium welfare is <a href="http://econjwatch.org/articles/do-economists-reach-a-conclusion-on-subsidies-for-sports-franchises-stadiums-and-mega-events" target="_blank"> a lousy investment</a> <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-atlanta-braves-stadium/" target="_blank"> at every level</a> of the game; in fact, unless they're <a href="http://deadspin.com/floridas-go-to-stadium-economist-is-a-hack-a-shill-an-1794379314" target="_blank"> being paid by sports teams</a>, most experts agree that cities hoping to stimulate their economies would be better off literally showering cash on the streets, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMQbQYL8IGI" target="_blank"> Joker's parade-style</a>.<br /><br />Like the Wall Street bailouts, stadium subsidies socialize risk and privatize profit. When funded by sales taxes or local lotteries, they shift costs predominantly onto middle- and lower-class citizens. Even when municipalities try to pass the buck to non-locals by drawing on tourist or <a href="http://www.fieldofschemes.com/2017/06/02/12518/atlanta-picks-car-rental-taxes-as-way-to-raise-142-5m-to-give-hawks-for-arena-renovations/" target="_blank">rental-car taxes</a>, arena welfare still carries an enormous opportunity cost: every dollar spent on refurbishing Atlanta's Phillips Arena, for example, is a dollar not spent on schools or roads, or on cutting property taxes.<br /><br />Still, we can't stop ourselves. In 2003, taxpayers in Glendale, Arizona, <a href="https://www.glendaleaz.com/pressroom/documents/CityofGlendaleandCoyotesFactSheet.pdf" target="_blank">spent roughly $186 million on a new hockey arena—an amount that will climb to almost $224 million</a> when construction bonds are fully paid off in 2033. The public has since coughed up roughly $70 million in additional operating costs, and <a href="https://thinkprogress.org/arizona-city-lays-off-workers-while-handing-millions-to-its-professional-ice-hockey-team-e9503a8c5804" target="_blank">cut the staffing of city departments to cover those expenses.</a><br /><br />The payoff? Glendale now finds itself wrangling with the Arizona Coyotes over the team's desire for <i>another</i> taxpayer-financed building that's <a href="http://www.fiveforhowling.com/2017/5/11/15485614/nhl-arizona-coyotes-arena-issues-rumor-gila-river-arena" target="_blank">closer to where most of its local fan base lives.</a> <br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767536073-USATSI_9634751.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">When someone mentions a federal tax on stadium subsidies. Photo by Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"> <source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767536073-USATSI_9634751.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767536073-USATSI_9634751.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767536073-USATSI_9634751.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767536073-USATSI_9634751.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767536073-USATSI_9634751.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767536073-USATSI_9634751.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767536073-USATSI_9634751.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767536073-USATSI_9634751.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> <source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767536073-USATSI_9634751.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767536073-USATSI_9634751.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> </picture> <br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>Enter the silver bullet: the 100 percent federal tax. It was first proposed in a <a href="http://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications_papers/pub_display.cfm?id=672" target="_blank">1995 article written for the Minneapolis Federal Reserve</a> by a pair of economists, Arthur Rolnick and Melvin Burstein, who recommended applying it to <i> all</i> local subsidies given to individual corporations—a policy that would have saved the public tens of <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/12/01/us/government-incentives.html" target="_blank">billions of dollars in corporate welfare costs</a>.<br /><br />How would it work for sports? Simple. Suppose you're the Milwaukee Bucks, and suppose <a href="http://archive.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/interest-could-push-public-cost-of-new-bucks-arena-over-400-million-b99510427z1-305636241.html/" target="_blank">Wisconsin politicians give you between $250 and $400 million</a> to build a new stadium. Under Rolnick and Burstein's plan, the Internal Revenue Service would subsequently hand you a tax bill for the exact same amount.<br /><br />Just like that, sports stadium welfare would be dead and buried. No more <a href="http://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/the-stupid-sports-stadium-clause-thats-screwing-you-over">promising to pay the Cincinnati Bengals for a future "holographic replay system"</a> when you're already reeling from stadium debt service that figures to cripple your municipal budget for years. No more giving the Minnesota Vikings roughly $500 million for a new stadium—and then allowing the franchise to <a href="http://www.startribune.com/public-parking-ramp-s-new-mills-fleet-farm-name-benefits-vikings/400186701/" target="_blank">collect the money for the naming rights to a nearby parking garage</a>, too. <br /><br />"If you're the owner of the Vikings, why bother coming to the city or state for anything?" Rolnick <a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/48849938/" target="_blank">told me in 2013</a>. "You'll just have to turn it over to the federal government. Overnight, all of the bidding wars end. The [Cleveland] Browns never move to Baltimore. And the real beauty is that it's a tax you'll never have to collect.<br /><br />"It was a simple idea. And it scared the hell out of [sports owners]."<br /><br />Maybe it scares you, as well. After all, America is a representative democracy, a nation rooted in self-governance. Can't We, the People trust ourselves to make wise spending decisions? To stop coughing up half a billion dollars so the Miami Marlins can have a nicer office with <a href="http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/marlins-terrible-home-run-sculpture-cost-more-than-most-of-their-roster-6526047" target="_blank">brand-name art</a>?<br /><br />No. We, the People most certainly cannot. Team owners versus the general public is a one-sided fight, a classic example of concentrated gain taking precedence over diffuse pain. When you're an owner, a government-funded stadium is a once—well, maybe twice—in-a-lifetime opportunity that will save you hundreds of millions of dollars while boosting both your regular revenue and overall franchise value. By contrast, the price of said stadium is barely noticeable to any individual taxpayer: the aforementioned $3.7 billion in lost tax revenues Brookings found comes out to <a href="http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/study-taxpayers-lose-billions-on-federal-stadium-subsidies/article/2601687" target="_blank">just $27 per each federal tax return filed in 2015</a>.<br /><br />Small wonder, then, that owners go to the wall for subsidies—and by "the wall," I mean <i>the bank. </i>In Texas, where citizens <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/on-election-day-rangers-get-500-million-chargers-get-permission-to-move-to-la">voted to fund half of a new $1 billion ballpark</a> for the Rangers in November, the pro-stadium-subsidy group Vote Yes! Keep The Rangers <a href="http://www.dallasnews.com/news/arlington/2016/10/11/pro-rangers-ballpark-backers-outspending-opponents-264-1" target="_blank">raised a reported $617,707</a>, mostly from the Rangers organization itself, and spent $564,479 in a single campaign reporting period leading up to Election Day. An opposing group, Citizens for a Better Arlington, raised a little less than $8,000 and spent $2,264 in the same time. That kind of disparity is hardly unusual: in Santa Clara, California, backers of a new stadium for the San Francisco 49ers <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/2010/08/02/49ers-spent-nearly-5-million-on-santa-clara-stadium-election-2/" target="_blank">spent almost $5 million in 2010</a> on a successful campaign to convince voters to create a public agency to own and finance the building, while an opposing group raised about $20,000.<br /><br />"These guys are good," Rolnick told me in 2013. "They're really good. And it's an old problem. Look at the subsidies that go to farmers. Looks at the billions they get. You have a small number of people with a huge potential gain going against a large number of people with a small potential individual loss. Who is going to fight harder? That's what we're up against."<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767767310-USATSI_7990929.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">When you outspend your political opponents by a 250-1 margin. Photo by Kelley L Cox-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table></div><br />Even when we take a long look in the mirror, resolve to stay clean and sober, and choose sparkling water with lime instead of funding a new San Diego Chargers stadium, there's another problem: we can't trust our duly elected representatives to do the right thing, either. Team owners know how to play them even better than the public, typically through a carrot-and-stick approach.<br /><br />The stick? Threatening to decamp to another city. No local politician wants to be remembered as the Mayor Who Lost the Team—and plenty would love to be remembered for the opposite. Former Washington, D.C., Mayor Sharon Pratt Kelly <a href="http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/rutjulp6&amp;div=7&amp;id=&amp;page=" target="_blank">once described</a> civic extortion by sports franchises as "a prisoner's dilemma of sorts." If no mayor gives in to the demands of a franchise shopping for a new home, she said, then the team will stay where they are. But if "Mayor A is not willing to pay the team's requested price, Mayor B may think it is advantageous to open up the city's wallet. Then to protect his or her interest, Mayor A often ends up paying the demanded price."<br /><br />As for the carrot? Follow the money. For decades, Rolnick has traveled across the country, testifying in local hearings against sports stadium welfare. He comes alone, delivers a killjoy message, presents boring numbers. Meanwhile, teams enlist small armies of lawyers, lobbyists, public relations people, and fans. They make cheery, ludicrously Panglossian pitches:<i> Give us $87.5 million for a new soccer stadium, and <a href="http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article127702734.html" target="_blank">it will be the defining accomplishment of our generation, as well as something that will heal Charlotte's racial divisions</a>. Build us a new football stadium, and <a href="http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2016/10/10/casino-industry-leaders-back-las-vegas-stadium-proposal.html" target="_blank">annual tourism in Las Vegas will increase by 10 to 20 million people</a>.</i> <br /><br />When the public hearings are over, Rolnick told me, those same team operatives work the offices and meeting rooms of the politicians involved. "If you're a governor, it's 'You build me an office tower, you build me a stadium, and next election, I'll be in your corner,'" he said. "There are big incentives to do this."<br /><br />Given those incentives, it's hardly surprising that Cleveland's city council voted to spend $70 million to renovate a basketball arena—and then <a href="http://www.vocativ.com/432342/cleveland-tries-to-kill-anti-stadium-funding-petition-chaos-ensues/" target="_blank">put the kibosh on citizens demanding a public referendum on the planned outlay</a>. Or that local politicians in Cobb County, Georgia, approved a plan to spend at least $300 million on a new suburban Atlanta baseball stadium without any public debate, even <a href="http://www.atlantamagazine.com/news-culture-articles/did-cobb-commissioners-briefings-on-the-braves-violate-the-open-meetings-act/" target="_blank">standing in hallways to avoid a quorum and therefore get around the state's open-meetings laws</a>. Or that city officials in Miami called a secretive midnight meeting to approve selling $500 million of bonds to fund a baseball stadium <a href="http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2012-12-17/news/fl-readers-view-marlins-20121217_1_stadiums-end-era-fire-sale" target="_blank">that will ultimately cost taxpayers $2.4 billion</a>. <br /><br />Can voters punish politicians for stupid spending after the fact? Of course. Cobb County Commission Chair Tim Lee <a href="http://www.ajc.com/news/local-govt--politics/cobb-county-voters-send-lee-packing-boyce-elected-new-chairman/amm2QpAS9oVjtaozOwvfXP/" target="_blank">lost his seat in a subsequent election</a>, and Miami mayor Carlos Alvarez <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/landslide-recall-miami-dade-mayor-carlos-alvarez/story?id=13148353" target="_blank">lost in the largest recall of any local politician in American history</a>.<br /><br />Problem is, accountability comes too late. The money's already gone. We need a law that will stop sports stadium welfare before it starts. And not legal half-measures. Those won't work. Never have. Sports owners aren't just rich and motivated. They're <i> creative.</i> With hundreds of millions at stake, they always find ways around limited efforts to stanch the public's financial bleeding.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/48849938/" target="_blank">To wit</a>, in 1986, former Senator Pat Moynihan (D-NY) was able to close a loophole for federal tax-exempt private revenue bonds being used for stadium construction. What happened next? Sports teams began talking local governments into financing stadiums with tax-exempt general-purpose bonds that ultimately shifted <i>more</i> costs onto the public, producing the $3.7 billion price tag estimated by Brookings. <br /><br />A decade ago, Seattle voters passed a law forbidding the city from financially helping sports teams unless the investment yields a profit for taxpayers on par with U.S. Treasury bond yields; as the <i> Seattle Times</i> explained, prospective NBA owner Chris Hansen <a href="http://seattletimes.com/text/2020844961.html" target="_blank">nearly landed the Sacramento Kings by devising a clever way around the prohibition</a>. Even state constitutions are no match: while Washington's plainly states that taxes "shall be levied and collected for public purposes only," in 1996 the state's Supreme Court ruled that the public could help pay for a new Seattle Mariners stadium.<br /><br />Other ideas for stymieing stadium sports welfare have shortcomings. Missouri lawmakers have proposed <a href="http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/lawmaker-future-team-owners-would-have-to-pay-debt-before/article_e1ee8e37-1ebc-5b85-aa07-367576978b89.html" target="_blank">making sports owners who relocate their teams to other states responsible for any stadium debt left behind</a>, and Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) <a href="http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/relocating-sports-teams-should-pay-back-public-funds-mccaskill-says/article_3e3d185b-708e-58ea-82a9-cbb98183784c.html" target="_blank">has considered proposing the same law on a national scale</a>. It's a perfectly fine concept, but it fails to cover the total and totally unnecessary debt taxpayers take on in the first place.<br /><br />Sports law professor Marc Edelman has suggested <a href="http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/rutjulp6&amp;div=7&amp;id=&amp;page=" target="_blank">a federal law that would remove the Sports Broadcasting Act's limited antitrust exemption</a> from any league where at least one team accepts public stadium funding without giving taxpayers a cut of the building's revenues. Again, that would be an improvement over the status quo, but it wouldn't prevent team owners from continuing to profit at the public's expense.<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767953962-USATSI_10089838_168380978_lowres.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Pay to play. Photo by Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"> <source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767953962-USATSI_10089838_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767953962-USATSI_10089838_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767953962-USATSI_10089838_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767953962-USATSI_10089838_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767953962-USATSI_10089838_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=850:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767953962-USATSI_10089838_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source> <source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767953962-USATSI_10089838_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767953962-USATSI_10089838_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> <source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767953962-USATSI_10089838_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1050:*, https://video-images.vice.com/_uncategorized/1496767953962-USATSI_10089838_168380978_lowres.jpeg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source> </picture> <br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>Rolnick's tax is different. It cuts to the heart of the matter, what Rolnick calls the "economic war among the states," in which companies create bidding wars between local governments by threatening to move their offices elsewhere. It's the dilemma described by former D.C. Mayor Kelly, and one that extends well beyond sports.<br /><br />In fact, it was a 1991 effort by Minnesota–based Northwest Airlines to secure about $1 billion in subsidies that first piqued Rolnick's interest in this phenomenon. The company was in financial tatters. The state was in a recession. Rolnick did the math. The proposed deal was a lousy investment, so Rolnick advised against it, loudly and publicly. "Northwestern said, 'We'll create jobs,'" he said. "I said, 'All companies create jobs. If we do this for you guys, we could do this for anybody.' But that's not the government's role. We are supposed to build schools and roads. Not bail out companies."<br /><br />Rolnick says a high-ranking state politician pulled him aside to explain what was really happening: <i>This is about Northwest's headquarters. If we don't do it for these guys, they'll leave. And we'll lose jobs.</i> When I spoke with Rolnick a few years ago, he was still incredulous. <br /><br />"What happens is that from a national economic perspective, you get a zero-sum game," he said. "Not a single job created. You're just moving them around. So these subsidies make no economic sense. But at a local level, they're very seductive. You're a mayor, a governor, you attract a business like this, you get a win. But if you think about it like a war, you're just winning a battle. Then the next state or city comes along and bids below you.<br /><br />"The sports teams are the best at playing this game by far. No pun intended. And my criticism isn't really against the CEOs or the owners of the teams. I would do the same if I was them. My criticism is of Congress. They can fix the rules of the game."<br /><br />Therein lies the rub: historically, Congress has shown little appetite for fixing anything. When the Congressional Research Service released a 1996 report showing that tax-exempt bonds were costing the federal treasury about 34 percent of new stadium construction costs, <a href="http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/1996-06-26/news/9606250448_1_tax-free-bonds-daniel-patrick-moynihan-million-arena" target="_blank">Senator Moynihan introduced the Stop Tax-Exempt Arena Debt Issuance Act</a> to rectify the matter. Local governments already committed to funding new projects—like a $292 million football stadium in Nashville—lobbied against the bill. It floundered. Three years later, former Vice President Joe Biden, then a Delaware Senator, co-sponsored a bill that would have required MLB and the NFL to pay up to 50 percent of construction costs for new stadiums. Again, no dice.<br /><br />That same year, former Representative David Minge (D-MN) <a href="http://fiscalpolicy.org/h-r-1060-the-distorting-subsidies-limitation-act" target="_blank">introduced a bill</a> in the House that essentially would have made the Rolnick-Burstein proposal law. It died in committee. No one introduced a similar measure in the Senate. "[Former Minnesota Senator] Paul Wellstone wanted to introduce it," Rolnick said. "But Minge didn't want it to be a Minnesota bill. They got [Arizona Senator John] McCain's people interested in it. I had some very influential senators interested in it. But when they canvassed their colleagues, it didn't go anywhere. <br /><br />"I think the sports teams got it killed. But if I had to do it again, I might have narrowed it to the sports teams. Because I think the public would get it. You need grassroots outrage over this stuff. We're closing schools. And we're going to build another stadium?"<br /><br />Putting an end to sports stadium welfare—and the competitive conditions that lead to it—is eminently doable. The European Union has rules that successfully prevent inter-country bidding wars; so do the United States and Canada under the North American Free Trade Agreement. <br />A Death Star federal tax would work. What's missing is the will to enact one. And ultimately, that's not the fault of anyone in Congress. It's on us—super fans and sports know-nothings alike, all of us taxpayers, unwilling or unable to admit that we have a bad habit. An addiction we simply can't kick on our own. Decades ago, former Senator Byron Dorgan (R-ND) <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/1996/07/27/business/picking-up-the-tab-for-fields-of-dreams-taxpayers-build-stadiums-owners-cash-in.html?src=pm" target="_blank">joked</a> that "the only remaining healthy public housing is in sports stadiums for wealthy team owners." It was, in the parlance of the recovery movement, a moment of clarity.<br /><br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/a-long-lost-tax-plan-scares-sports-teams-and-could-save-america-billions"><b>Read the original article at VICE Sports</b></a>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-25383253405473500952017-06-08T08:41:00.003-04:002017-06-08T10:04:16.686-04:00What's Next For Human Engineering In Sports?<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_8-AhNIcpAk/WTlF9JZFT1I/AAAAAAAADv0/OvtW35DNgiM1r1jje1-YQv16nqZEpuDbwCLcB/s1600/bionics-gene-doping-and-brain-training-whats-next-for-human-engineering-in-sports-1491509147.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" data-original-height="898" data-original-width="1600" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-_8-AhNIcpAk/WTlF9JZFT1I/AAAAAAAADv0/OvtW35DNgiM1r1jje1-YQv16nqZEpuDbwCLcB/s1600/bionics-gene-doping-and-brain-training-whats-next-for-human-engineering-in-sports-1491509147.jpg" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead> A Conversation with "The Body Builders" author Adam Piore about the future of medicine, technology, and performance-enhancement in sports.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | April 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">A&nbsp;</span>powder that helps badly damaged muscle tissue regenerate. Genetically engineered mice that can scale ladders while carrying three times their body weight. Computerized bionic limbs that function like the real thing, responding to cues in the surrounding environment. Science fiction? Guess again. In his recent book <i>The Body Builders: Inside the Science of the Engineered Human</i><a href="https://www.harpercollins.com/9780062347145/the-body-builders" target="_blank">,</a> journalist Adam Piore explores the cutting edge of medical and scientific efforts to rebuild and augment the human body—efforts that have an intriguing amount of overlap with sports.<br /><div class="article__blockquote"><br /></div>VICE Sports recently caught up with Piore to discuss his book, the state of current human engineering research, and potential applications for athletes. This conversation has been lightly edited for clarity.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>VICE Sports:</b> <b>When we think of using medical science to engineer human performance in sports, we generally think of performance-enhancing drugs; for example, doctors use steroids to treat muscle-wasting diseases, and then athletes quickly figure out you can use the same drugs to build more muscle in healthy people. In the book, you write about one of the next major medical frontiers—genetic therapies and modification—and how some people in sports are concerned about <i>gene </i>doping.</b><br /><b><br /></b> <b>In layman's terms, what is gene doping, and how is it different than the PED use we're familiar with?</b><br /><br />Adam Piore: So gene doping is when you're basically altering your genome. You're altering the molecular blueprint in your body that tells your body how to build things. In the book, I look at a compound in your body called myostatin. It functions as an off switch for muscle growth—when your body releases it, it keeps your muscle growth within normal bounds. When you lift weights and exercise, your body turns down the amount of myostatin it releases so you get bigger.<br /><br />Well, it turns out there are people with a genetic mutation who don't produce myostatin, and without that, you grow abnormally large muscles. Researchers had already found this mutation in dogs and cattle. The first confirmed case of it in humans was with a baby in Germany. The kid's mother had been a professional sprinter. His grandfather could lift entire curbstones with his bare hands. After the baby was born, doctors noticed that his muscles were quivering, and that he barely had any fat on him.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>That sounds like someone else you write about in your book, a little boy from Michigan named Liam Hoekstra. At five months old, he was able to grab his mother's forefingers and lift himself in the air like a gymnast doing an iron cross; at age three, he had six-pack abs, and literally punched a hole in the wall during a tantrum. Did he have the same mutation?</b><br /><br />They couldn't find that exact mutation in him. But [scientists] think it must be something similar, a mutation that interferes with myostatin in some way.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>So has Liam grown into becoming some sort of super athlete? Is he still unusually strong and muscular?</b><br /><br />They won't really know until he hits adolescence, and grows into his full adult body. He's not there yet. But he likes to play hockey and wrestling, and he's really good—so good [that] some of the parents of the kids he's playing against have complained.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>It's easy to see how this stuff this could apply to sports.</b><br /><br />It's not hard! If you could change your own genome to not make this regulator anymore, it could make you stronger and more muscular. And it would be very hard to detect, for people to know if you were natural or altered.<br /><br />There are other [genetic] mutations out there that mirror some of the effects people are going for when they use PEDs. There's a famous case of a Finnish cross-country skiing champion [<i>Eero Mäntyranta, who won gold medals at the 1960 and 1964 Winter Olympics</i> <i>—Ed.</i>] who had a mutation that gave him an abnormally high amount of hemoglobin in his blood. Hemoglobin is a protein that carries oxygen to your muscles, which they need for energy. If you have extra hemoglobin, you can run or work longer without tiring.<br /><br />Athletes that use the drug EPO [erythropoietin] are basically doing the same thing. So again, if you could change your genome to make more hemoglobin, that would be beneficial.<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508166.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Under the right circumstances, it's possible that athletes might seek medical and scientific ways to augment their physical performance. Photo by Rick Scuteri-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"><source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508166.jpg?resize=400:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508166.jpg?resize=600:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508166.jpg?resize=650:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508166.jpg?resize=975:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508166.jpg?resize=850:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508166.jpg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508166.jpg?resize=1050:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508166.jpg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source><source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508166.jpg?resize=1050:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508166.jpg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source></picture><br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div><b>So how close are we to seeing this kind of intentional genetic modification in humans? In athletes?</b><br /><br />The human genome is enormously complex. When you're looking at using gene therapies on diseases—or gene doping—these are rare cases where a single mutation affects something, but a lot of times our diseases are caused by multiple environmental factors and genetic mutations. If you want to understand those diseases, you need to understand how hundreds of different genes that are part of a bigger genome are working together, and you also have to look at lots of people who are suffering from that disease. I went to an institute in China that has more computational and genetic sequencing power than any other place in the world, and they still don't have the firepower to map all of that out.<br />Still, one of the researchers I talked to in the book, Lee Sweeney, thinks there might be athletes in the Olympics who are already gene doping. He doesn't have any evidence, but he says it's already technically possible. That's something [the World Anti-Doping Agency] worries about, too.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Is it possible that WADA would be able to develop tests for gene doping?</b><br /><br />Sweeney also serves on a panel for them to come up with tests. Right now, you have to use viral vectors to deliver the genes to people. So if you test somebody in time, you can see traces of gene doping, but over time those traces will disappear, and the changes in the body will be permanent.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Medical research is done under fairly stringent ethical standards—we have regulatory agencies, research review boards, even the Hippocratic oath and the simple, powerful idea of <i>do no harm. </i>By contrast, what we generally see in sports is that people will grab any advantage they can in order win; there's a mindset of,<i> if one pill makes me run faster, I'm going to swallow 20.</i> In what ways do you think it's possible that the sports world will push forward this area of human enhancement because the people in it look at risk differently, and don't necessarily care about who gets hurt in the process?</b><br /><br />I talked to the chemist in the BALCO story, Patrick Arnold, went to visit him in his lab in Illinois. [<i>BALCO was a mid-2000s PED scandal involving a number of prominent athletes, including Olympic sprinter Marion Jones and Major League Baseball slugger Barry Bonds </i><i>—Ed.</i>] What he had done was go to the medical literature and found a steroid that had never been approved [for medical use] before. That ended up being the basis for "the clear" [<i>the undetectable steroid compound at the heart of the BALCO scandal</i>]. He was working at a hair product company at the time, nobody was paying attention to him at the lab, so he just started brewing up steroids.<br /><br />I reviewed his story as a cautionary tale. It's what people like Lee Sweeney are worried about, too—that the same thing will happen with gene doping. If you look at the history of steroids, a lot of what we know about their negative effects comes from studying former East German athletes who were part of a systematic, state-sponsored doping program. It may end up the same with gene therapy.<br /><br />Sadly, we may learn about the unintended consequences from sports.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Sweeney has personal reason to worry, right?</b><br /><br />He does. He studies muscles, and he was always being asked to give speeches at conference for parents of children with Duchenne disease, which essentially causes your muscles to tear themselves apart over time. People always asked him, "Why isn't anyone working on this?" Also, his grandmother loved to garden, was very active, but as she became older, her muscles wasted away and she ended up bedridden.<br /><br />So Lee started to study what happens in the body to cause muscle growth and repair, and the genetics of that. He ultimately gave mice a mutation that gave them huge, ripped muscles. As soon as he published his paper, he got lots and lots of media attention, and he was deluged by people in sports. I talked to his secretary, and she told me Lee was called by a high school football coach who wanted him to gene dope his whole team!<br /><br />Since then, another researcher at Johns Hopkins has discovered how to create the mutation for myostatin in mice. They had ripped muscles. Chinese researchers have used gene therapy to give a dog huge muscles. Recently, Lee has made ripped golden retrievers, but he did it quietly, because every time he gets press on this, he is besieged by calls from athletes who want him to make them strong.<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508041.jpeg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Researcher Lee Sweeney. Screengrab via&nbsp;<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcpOhu1Ip4M" style="font-size: medium; text-align: start;" target="_blank"><i>Biotherapies Institute for Rare Diseases</i></a><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QcpOhu1Ip4M" style="font-size: medium; text-align: start;" target="_blank"></a><span style="font-size: small; text-align: start;">/YouTube</span></td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"><source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508041.jpeg?resize=400:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508041.jpeg?resize=600:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508041.jpeg?resize=650:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508041.jpeg?resize=975:* 2x"></source><source media="(min-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508041.jpeg?resize=797:*"></source></picture><br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div><b>Weren't some of the researchers you wanted to talk to for your book so concerned about this sort of stuff that they didn't return your calls? </b><br /><br />One researcher hung up on me when I called him. He was the author of a study about a mutation for a gene that allows you to feel pain. The backstory is that there was this kid that kept showing up in an emergency room in Pakistan. He made his money as a street performer, sticking knives in his arms. He would show up bleeding to get stitched up. The doctors thought that maybe he had a mutation to where he didn't feel pain.<br /><br />So some British doctors fly out to study him. By the time they get there, the boy already had died—he had jumped off a roof, trying to impress his friends. They took genetic samples from people in his village and discovered a mutation in a gene that is involved in pain pathways in the body. If you can engineer that, you can imagine people in a boxing match or football wanting it.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>For me, the most <i>no fucking way</i> chapter in your the book involves research that is attempting to regrow human organs and limbs. Realistically, where are those efforts at right now, how do they actually work, and where might they be in the near future?</b><br /><br />They've already found ways to regenerate large chunks of muscle. Say you lose that in your leg. Normally, your body would paste it over with scar tissue. You wouldn't grow back muscle. But now, they can mute the signaling agent that tells your body to grow scar tissue, and instead use stem cells to regrow muscle.<br /><br />There are efforts to regrow bone and veins in the lab. In the next few years, we may see those therapies. In terms of organs, they've regrown a bunch of them in the lab. But with something like the lungs, it's so complicated, and if you fail, somebody could die. So some of the work is on patching organs.<br /><br />Already, with a lot of donated hearts [for organ transplants], by the time they get to the transplantation pace, so much of the organ has died that you have to throw it out. So they are researching ways to repair parts of the heart tissue in order to be able to use it.<br /><br />The bigger challenge is regrowing things with multiple kinds of tissue. That is much more complicated. How do the stem cells know what to become? How do they work? They get signals from their environment and that tells them what to do. We're just starting to understand what those signals are—for example, if you put more pressure on stem cells, they are more likely to grow into muscles.<br /><br />There is a guy in Boston who has created worms with two heads. He does that by manipulating electrical signals. It's kind of mind blowing. He hopes in his lifetime to be able to regrow an arm. They're trying to do that with mice now. He said to me, "I fail to see how regrowing limbs is impossible. We see it in nature. Salamanders do it all the time."<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Could any of these sorts of therapies find their way to sports? </b><br /><br />There's this one technique I talk about in the book—believe it or not, they found that if you put pig guts into muscle, just the scaffolding, the body tends to break it down, and that releases proteins and signaling agents that tell stem cells to converge on the site and fix things. They've tried to use this to regenerate an Achilles' tendon in a dog. They found that in humans, it was harder to do, and as the tendon grew back it was weak. But it does seem that in the future, if they can master this, they could solve some of the career-altering sports injuries we see. A lot of this is about unlocking the latent mechanisms of resilience in our bodies. That could be transformative.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>In another chapter, you explore efforts to create drugs that boost memory. Could that apply to sports? Wouldn't those be potentially performance-enhancing substances for chess players, or for Tom Brady—or for Bill Belichick, for that matter? </b><br /><br />Maybe. I guess if you want to memorize a playbook or something. Speed up your learning. Those drugs have proven difficult to develop.<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508320.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">When they tell you that scientists are working on brain steroids. Photo by Mark J. Rebilas-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"><source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508320.jpg?resize=400:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508320.jpg?resize=600:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508320.jpg?resize=650:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508320.jpg?resize=975:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508320.jpg?resize=850:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508320.jpg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508320.jpg?resize=1050:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508320.jpg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source><source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508320.jpg?resize=1050:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508320.jpg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source></picture><br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div>But there's also a chapter in the book for something called implicit learning. That's even more potent. Basically, it's your unconscious pattern-matching abilities—like muscle memory, but with visual expertise. People in sports already know this: If you want to get good at hitting a baseball, you do it over and over again. It turns out the same kind of drilling applies to all sorts of unconscious expertise.<br /><br />In the military, they found that soldiers kept coming back from Afghanistan and Iraq saying, "One guy in my unit always just knew when something was wrong. He could sense an ambush coming. He could feel when there was an IED. Even though he couldn't point to what, exactly, gave him that sense." That's what I'm talking about. Again, you can see this in sports, but it was a surprise in the military. They are working on ways to train this kind of intuition, and understanding how that happens in the brain.<br /><br />The military is also looking at something called the accelerated learning program. This came out of studies of the brains of Marine snipers at Camp Pendleton. The researchers wanted to see if they could learn anything about brain patterns associated with a bull's-eye. They found a brain state that happens right before the bull's-eyes—it's a zone of focused attention. Then they trained other shooters, who weren't experts, while monitoring their brain states and giving them feedback, sometimes with a buzzer, when they were in that same brain state. It helped them improve twice as fast.<br /><br />I'm sure you could do something similar with athletes, help train them to know when they are in the zone.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>One of the most intriguing characters in your book is a rock climber turned MIT researcher named Hugh Herr. Severe frostbite forced doctors to amputate both of his legs below the knee. He ends up creating his own aluminum prosthetics, and comes back to climbing <i>better </i>than before. That was 25 years ago. What are some of biggest breakthroughs and promising projects he has worked on since?</b><br /><br />After the amputation, Hugh used to dream that he would wake up and run through the cornfields behind his parents' house. Now he jogs every day! He has made bionic legs that replicate all of the constituent parts of the lower leg, so it feels like you are walking on the real thing. To do that, he uses the same sort of technologies you see on EA Sports video games—the motion capture, when you see LeBron James in a suit with all those little silver balls on them. Hugh used that technology to understand how tendons, ligaments, and muscles worked in the human leg. He expresses that mathematically—if your leg hits the ground at this angle, the knee is over here, the foot is over there—and he puts that into his designs.<br /><br />Recently, he developed an exoskeleton for the lower limbs. You can put it on your boot. It has motors and it feeds energy into your lower limbs as you are working, so you are able to walk and expend a lot less energy. He designed this by reverse-engineering the human leg. In 10 to 20 years from now, he says, if we want to visit a friend across town, we won't get into a large metal box. We'll just strap on the latest contraption to our legs and jog there.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>You also write about Herr developing a running shoe that contained two springs—one in the heel and one in the toe—connected by a strip of carbon. This was designed to catapult runners forward with extra force, and you note that the shoe could "increase speed, reduce the metabolic cost of running," and "soften the force exerted on the joints by as much as 20 percent." That sounds pretty good! You also write that Herr offered the shoe to Nike, which passed on it. What happened, and why don't we all wear running shoes like that right now?</b><br /><br />I'm not sure. It does sound pretty cool. I don't know what [Nike] was thinking!<br /><br /><div class="article__media"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img alt="" src="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508492.jpg" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Justin Gatlin worked with a biomechanics expert to improve his starts and running form before the Rio Games. Photo by Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><picture class="article__image"><source media="(max-width: 25em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508492.jpg?resize=400:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508492.jpg?resize=600:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 40.625em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508492.jpg?resize=650:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508492.jpg?resize=975:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 53.125em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508492.jpg?resize=850:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508492.jpg?resize=1275:* 2x"></source><source media="(max-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508492.jpg?resize=1050:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508492.jpg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source><source media="(min-width: 65.625em)" srcset="https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508492.jpg?resize=1050:*, https://sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/04/06/untitled-article-1491506953-body-image-1491508492.jpg?resize=1575:* 2x"></source></picture><br /><div class="article__image-caption"><br /></div></div><b>When we talk about human enhancement in sports, the story is often about medical and scientific knowledge being discovered in the larger world, usually to treat disease or injury, and then applied to running faster, jumping higher, building stronger muscles. Can it work the other way?</b><br /><br />It can. This past summer, I went down to Orlando to watch Justin Gatlin, the 100-meter sprinter, train. He was working with a totally legal biomechanist. He and his coach claimed that he was now clean of steroids, and that the biomechanist was trying to give him more speed by using a computer program to precisely analyze the different angles of his body and stride, and maximize the efficiency of his movement.<br /><br />Again, the idea was to reverse-engineer the human body, and then use that knowledge to restore and enhance performance. Justin Gatlin went from one of the slowest starting sprinters the biomechanist had ever seen to one of the fastest and best. He actually had a distinct advantage over [Jamaican sprinter and Rio Olympic 100-meter champion] Usain Bolt in that respect. Bolt's advantage was speed in the stretch. Justin was trying to overcome that by getting out of the blocks more quickly.<br /><br />These same technologies are what is allowing people to build those bionic prosthetics that feel like the real thing on your leg.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>You write that with his very first climbing prosthetics, Herr was no longer disabled. He was <i>augmented.</i> What kind of mechanical augmentation might we see in the near future, and can you see or imagine any of it spreading to sports?</b><br /><br />I tried on an exoskeleton in Japan that allowed me to lift 100 pounds with my fingertips. They have a big need for exoskeletons, because they have a large elderly population, and those people are always throwing out their backs. So they're building ones that can help people get in and out of bed. They're also building ones that help construction workers lift heavy loads.<br /><br />The military is looking to augment soldier performance with exoskeletons, too, but they haven't been totally successful. You don't want to give up mobility in a firefight. But you can imagine soldiers using stuff like what Hugh Herr invented, something that saves energy during long marches.<br /><br />In sports, you are going to see amputees with prosthetics who run faster than able-bodied humans. I don't think the day is very far away where we see Paralympians breaking speed records. I don't know how, exactly, they are going to manage this. It's something to think about.<br /><br /><b><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/bionics-gene-doping-and-brain-training-whats-next-for-human-engineering-in-sports">Click here to read the original article at VICE Sports</a></b>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-6413380037387136332017-03-25T15:15:00.001-04:002017-03-25T15:28:59.384-04:00"We Deserve To Be Paid"<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-onvWc6n9uMY/WNbBuUf1ZAI/AAAAAAAADt4/5kfU8Ph-fAESmVR1TTska-ySfF0FVWgLQCLcB/s1600/nigel-hayes-tk-1489680774.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-onvWc6n9uMY/WNbBuUf1ZAI/AAAAAAAADt4/5kfU8Ph-fAESmVR1TTska-ySfF0FVWgLQCLcB/s1600/nigel-hayes-tk-1489680774.jpg" /></a><br /><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Nigel Hayes is playing in March Madness, and taking on NCAA amateurism in federal court</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | March 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">"W</span><strong>e deserve to be paid."</strong> Nigel Hayes doesn't need to say this. He definitely didn't need to join an ongoing lawsuit against the National Collegiate Athletic Association, either. Taking on the college sports establishment can be a real headache—and frankly, Hayes could leave it alone. He has pro potential; he's well on his way to a meaningful degree; he appears to have a bright future, in or out of basketball. The system? It's working for him. Yet here he sits in the ballroom of a Washington, D.C. hotel, a few weeks before the start of the season, telling reporters that campus athletes like himself deserve a bigger piece of the pie.<br /><br />There are easier topics of conversation.<br /><br />Hayes could talk about being an all-academic honoree, and how he studied for a finance exam while attending the previous spring's NBA draft combine. He could bring up his <a href="https://www.landof10.com/wisconsin/one-family-will-never-able-repay-wisconsin-badgers-star-nigel-hayes-holiday-kindness">penchant for community service</a>, or his much-chronicled love of pancakes, or the time he charmed America's stenographers—and pretty much everyone else—during a previous NCAA postseason run by <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZ3mRPVzALU">humorously and purposefully peppering his press conference remarks</a> with finger-blistering words such as "cattywampus" and "antidisestablishmentarianism."<br /><div class="read-more"><br /></div>All of that would be safe. Uncontroversial. Heck, Hayes could even discuss hoops. This is the Big Ten's annual media day, after all, and the versatile six-foot-eight, 235-pound senior forward for Wisconsin had just been named the conference's preseason player of the year.<br /><br />Speaking of which.<br /><br />"It's the dumbest thing," Hayes says. "It's worse than a participation award. At least when you get a participation award, you did something."<br /><br />A small, satisfied smile.<br /><br />"Preseason player of the year, I didn't do anything. I showed up, and they said, 'You might be good this year. You might not. But we think you might!'"<br /><br />Herein lies the problem. Hayes is perceptive, and honest. Shut up and play ball? When he sees something, he says something. Two days from media day, Hayes will appear on ESPN's <i>College Gameday </i>before a Wisconsin home football game, holding a sign reading "Broke College Athlete Anything Helps<i>" </i>and directing spectators to the brokebadger1 handle of a send-cash Venmo account. But right now, in this conference room, on an October afternoon, he's explaining how he and his teammates are being exploited, and why the same multibillion-dollar amateur campus sports economy that provides them with athletic scholarships—and not a nickel more—is bullshit.<br /><br />"I don't know how much money I've brought in [to Wisconsin]," Hayes says. "But it probably has been millions. I know Final Fours generate a lot of money, and I've been to two of those. So I deserve a check. Yeah. Just like all my teammates."<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1465px" data-original-width="2197px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/03/16/nigel-hayes-tk-body-image-1489680182.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Nigel Hayes, speaking his mind at Big Ten media day. Photo by Geoff Burke-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />As March Madness unfolds, Hayes likely won't be the only participant who believes that he deserves a larger share of the wealth generated by big-time college sports—including more than a billion dollars in annual television rights fees for the NCAA tournament alone. But he will be one of a handful of players willing to say that out loud, and the only athlete who is also challenging the status quo in court. A 22-year-old business finance major from Toledo, Ohio, Hayes is a named plaintiff on a federal antitrust lawsuit brought by former Clemson football player Martin Jenkins against the NCAA and the five most profitable sports conferences, a class-action case that seeks to overturn amateurism rules and create a free market for football and men's basketball players.<br /><br />While <i>Jenkins v. NCAA </i>has yet to be resolved—or even receive a trial date—Hayes already has taken flak. College athletics are popular; anyone seen as threatening them, less so. When Hayes added his name to the suit in 2014, a columnist for Wisconsin's student newspaper wrote that he couldn't empathize, and that Hayes should "hunker down, practice hard, and play well." More recently, <i>S</i><a href="http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketball/news/wisconsin-nigel-hayes-college-gameday-sign-broke-badger-venmo/9c3wcm9q84f71ns5k6ejoqy7m"><i>porting News</i></a><a href="http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketball/news/wisconsin-nigel-hayes-college-gameday-sign-broke-badger-venmo/9c3wcm9q84f71ns5k6ejoqy7m"> writer Mike DeCourcy scoffed at Hayes' protest sign,</a> arguing that if Hayes really felt like he was being fleeced by his school, he should have left for the NBA. Being a campus sports dissident is hard, and draining, and critics give you lots of unsolicited life advice. "As outspoken as Nigel can be, he's very sensitive to what people say about him," says Zach Bohannon, a friend and former Wisconsin teammate. "It can be a burden, weigh on you over time. It would be 110 percent easier to not do it."<br /><br />Hayes didn't have to make his life more challenging, or take on a system that has been stymying change since long before he was born. He <i>chose </i>to. And as his time as a college athlete comes to an end—the Badgers' next loss will be Hayes' last game in a Wisconsin uniform—one question lingers.<br />Why bother?<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1174px" data-original-width="2140px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/03/16/nigel-hayes-tk-body-image-1489681059.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Sam Dekker, Frank Kaminsky, and Nigel Hayes during the 2015 NCAA Tournament. Photo by Richard Mackson-USA TODAY Sports</div><strong><br /></strong> <strong>Frank Kaminsky was pissed.</strong> It was the summer of 2013, and the little-known junior center for Wisconsin was about to make a name for himself, eventually becoming college basketball's player of the year, a NBA draft lottery selection, and something of a folk hero.<br />But not yet. On this afternoon, the Badgers' upperclassmen were welcoming the program's incoming freshmen with a pickup game. No coaches. Kaminsky and Bohannon, a senior, on one side; newcomers Hayes and Vitto Brown on the other. "They just came in and dominated us," Bohannon says. "They were big and athletic and physical." When it was over, Kaminsky drop-kicked a basketball.<br /><br />"I remember him screaming at me, 'Zach, are you going to play any effing defense today?'" Bohannon says with a laugh. "That ball almost landed in the upper deck."<br /><br />Hayes didn't come to Wisconsin looking to change college sports. Just fitting in with his teammates—and maybe kicking their butts in practice—was enough. If anything, he was the sort of person amateurism advocates such as NCAA president Mark Emmert tout as living proof that the system is worth preserving. A real <i>student-athlete.</i> At Toledo's Whitmer High School, Hayes was a good-but-not-great basketball prospect, an unselfish big man who also excelled in football at wide receiver. "His junior year, he was on a team that went to the state semifinals, with guys that will be in the NFL," says Bruce Smith, Hayes' high school basketball coach. "And in my opinion, he was their best player.<br /><br />"I asked Nigel after his fifth game, 'How many times have you even been on the ground this season?' He said four. And he was upset! His goal was to be under ten for the whole year."<br /><br />Hayes was a stickler in the classroom as well, graduating with a 4.2 grade-point average and receiving straight A's. Er, almost. "One time he got a B," says his mother, Talaya Davis. "It was a big deal. I know because we were just talking about it. He still remembers the name of the teacher who gave it to him." Davis labels her son an "extremely easy kid"—never a problem in school, always studying or at the gym, an energetic self-starter. At Wisconsin, he could have stayed on that path, tending to his game and his homework and letting others worry about what's fair for college athletes. <i>Hunker down, practice hard, play well.</i><br /><br />Instead, Hayes met Bohannon, a voracious reader who, after choosing to major in economics, began devouring sports-related books like <i>Scorecasting</i> and <i>14 Sports Myths and Why They Are Wrong.</i> "On our team, I was an outspoken critic of the hot hand myth," Bohannon says. "Statistics don't back it up. Everyone laughed at me. They thought I was just a nerd who had never been hot before."<br /><br />For a debate class, Bohannon was asked to address pay-for-play in college athletics. He figured he would argue against it. <i>Pay us? Please</i>. Then he did his research. Many economists described the NCAA as a classic cartel: a group of competitors colluding to suppress on-field labor compensation by calling athletes amateurs, and then using the millions <i>not</i> going to players to build lavish facilities and enrich coaches and administrators. The numbers were stark: in the NFL and NBA, where athletes are represented by unions, they were receiving about 50 percent of total sports revenues; in big-time college football and men's basketball, they were getting about 10 percent. The average Division I football coach was<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/10/08/coaches-bonuses-gary-pinkel/73553784/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/10/08/coaches-bonuses-gary-pinkel/73553784/">making more than $2 million a year</a>. The average athletic director<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/03/06/college-athletics-directors-salaries-increase/1964239/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/03/06/college-athletics-directors-salaries-increase/1964239/">was pocketing more than $500,000 annually.</a> Meanwhile,<a href="http://www.ncpanow.org/research/body/The-Price-of-Poverty-in-Big-Time-College-Sport.pdf"> </a><a href="http://www.ncpanow.org/research/body/The-Price-of-Poverty-in-Big-Time-College-Sport.pdf">one study estimated that scholarship compensation left 85 percent of revenue sport athletes below the federal poverty line</a>, with many players<a href="http://www.playboy.com/articles/makers-into-takers"> </a><a href="http://www.playboy.com/articles/makers-into-takers">relying on federal Pell Grants and food stamps</a> to get by. Campus sports leaders talked about<a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/08/11/o_bannon_ruling_judge_claudia_wilken_s_laughable_claim_that_the_ncaa_wants.html"> </a><a href="http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2014/08/11/o_bannon_ruling_judge_claudia_wilken_s_laughable_claim_that_the_ncaa_wants.html">"protecting"</a> Bohannon and his peers from commercialization, but as far as he could tell, the only thing being protected was the lion's share of the money.<br /><br />"The more and more I started to learn for my debate, the more I realized there was no good reason that college athletes in the revenue sports shouldn't be paid," Bohannon says. "It's comical."<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1260px" data-original-width="855px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/03/16/nigel-hayes-tk-body-image-1489681344.jpg?output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Former Wisconsin basketball player Zach Bohannon. Photo by Mary Langenfeld-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Among his teammates, Bohannon was known for being informed and opinionated about politics and current events. He was the guy who embarked on a successful Twitter campaign to get President Barack Obama to visit with the Badgers during a 2012 campaign stop, and who always changed the locker room television from ESPN to CNN, MSNBC, or FOX News. Now he began to speak out about the NCAA. During Wisconsin's run to the 2014 Final Four, he was stopped by security while trying to enter Anaheim's Honda Center for a team practice. His crime? Carrying a bottle of Nestle-brand water. The NCAA's official water sponsor was Dasani. "They told me I couldn't come in," Bohannon says. "Not even with it inside my backpack."<br /><i><br /></i> <i>Is this a joke?</i> Bohannon asked.<br /><br />"They told me I had to throw it away, or rip off the label," he says.<br /><br />Hayes saw it all. He read the articles Bohannon passed along to him, like Pulitzer Prize-winning civil rights historian Taylor Branch's <i>Atlantic</i> cover story on the NCAA, which argued that amateurism was<a href="http://https//www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/308643/"> </a><a href="http://https//www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-sports/308643/">"a bill of attainder, stripping from college athletes the rights of American citizenship."</a> He listened when Bohannon shared tidbits from his ongoing research, like the fact that the term "student-athlete" was invented by the association in the 1950s to dodge workers' compensation payments to the families of athletes who had died playing college football. "Whenever I spoke about NCAA issues, Nigel was always there," Bohannon says. "He always had a twinkle in his eye. You could tell he was intrigued."<br /><br />Bohannon used up his playing eligibility that spring, but stuck around the basketball program while pursuing a graduate degree. He had become active with the National Collegiate Players' Association, a college athlete advocacy group founded by former UCLA linebacker Ramogi Huma. Huma previously had put Bohannon in touch with Sonny Vaccaro, a former shoe company dealmaker and longtime basketball insider who had become an outspoken critic of the NCAA. Vaccaro asked Bohannon to consider joining an antitrust lawsuit against the association over athlete name, image, and likeness rights brought by former UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon; Bohannon declined, feeling that he already was maxed out between basketball and studying. Still, he participated in the NCPA's weekly athlete conference calls, and later became close with Northwestern quarterback Kain Colter, who spearheaded <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/nlrb-to-northwestern-football-union">a unionization effort by his football teammates.</a><br /><br />In the summer of 2014, Huma reached out with a new opportunity. Another lawsuit against the NCAA was coming, this one directly challenging amateurism, and led by high-powered sports attorney Jeffrey Kessler, who previously had helped NFL players achieve free agency. Did Bohannon know any current college athletes who would be interested in joining?<br /><br />"I have the perfect guy," Bohannon said.<br /><br />Bohannon approached Hayes, the same fearless freshman who had beaten him out to be the Badgers' sixth man, and gone toe-to-toe with him in dozens of hard-fought practices. The teammate whose charisma would soon make him a fan favorite, and whose inquisitive, thoughtful nature reminded Bohannon of himself.<br /><i><br /></i> <i>Nigel, I think you should do this.</i><br /><i><br /></i> <i>Do you think this will best for me?</i><br /><i><br /></i> <i>Yes. And also for the cause of college athletes. </i><br /><i><br /></i> <i>OK, then I'm in. Tell me what I need to do.</i><br /><br />"There wasn't much debate," Bohannon says.<br /><hr /><center><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" scrolling="no" src="https://video.vice.com/en_us/embed/58911ad28ab179c64ccb6548" width="560"></iframe></center><strong>Hayes concurs.</strong> "It was an easy decision, actually," he says of joining the <i>Jenkins</i> suit. "That was young and naive Nigel. I was just thinking I could help athletes get paid to play."<br /><br />Another small smile.<br /><br />"Knowing what I know now, I would have said yes faster."<br /><br />Like Bohannon, Hayes didn't always object to NCAA rules against compensating athletes. He came to campus—to borrow a phrase—young and naive. That didn't last. Hayes read an article breaking down just how much money schools were making from jersey sales. He saw an online report that Emmert had been paid $1.9 million in 2014. At the same time, he found himself and his teammates wolfing down every last snack put out in the Wisconsin locker room during his freshman summer—"We were all out of money," Hayes says, "so we couldn't get anything else to eat"—and similarly out of luck when he wanted to go home to visit his parents. Hayes didn't have a car. He couldn't afford a plane ticket.<br /><br />"It was, 'Hey Mom, love you from Madison, would love to come see you, but I don't have any money,'" he says. "Meanwhile, there are no No. 10 jerseys [Hayes' number] at the [campus] bookstore. Not because they don't sell them, but because they're sold out.<br /><br />"That is when I was like, wait a second. There's a little disconnect here."<br /><br />Of course, it's one thing to believe that something is wrong, and quite another to speak out about it. Particularly when schools and coaches unilaterally control scholarships and playing time. "A lot of players are scared of repercussions," Bohannon says. "They don't want to rock the boat."<br /><br />Bohannon figured Hayes would be an ideal face for the <i>Jenkins</i> suit: smart, informed, a business student, and a key player on the floor. "From day one," he says, "you knew Nigel was going to do big things." What Bohannon didn't realize was how much Hayes would embrace <i>public</i> advocacy, too. A day before crashing ESPN's <i>Gameday </i>with his "broke athlete" Vimeo sign—Hayes ultimately raised <a href="https://www.landof10.com/wisconsin/one-family-will-never-able-repay-wisconsin-badgers-star-nigel-hayes-holiday-kindness">roughly $10,000, which he donated to a local Boys and Girls Club</a>—he took to Twitter to discuss pay-for-play.<br /><br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><div dir="ltr" lang="en">You make a company millions. They "pay" you with only a college education (estimated UW $160,000). <br /><br />Fair, right? <a href="https://t.co/Hy3yKP42hH">https://t.co/Hy3yKP42hH</a></div>— Nigel Hayes (@NIGEL_HAYES) <a href="https://twitter.com/NIGEL_HAYES/status/786983988145582080">October 14, 2016</a></blockquote><script async="" charset="utf-8" src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js"></script><br /><br /><br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">$40,000, I<br />— Nigel Hayes (@NIGEL_HAYES) <a href="https://twitter.com/NIGEL_HAYES/statuses/786988951638831104">October 14, 2016</a></blockquote><br /><br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">The <a href="https://www.blogger.com/%3C/p">— Nigel Hayes (@NIGEL_HAYES) </a><a href="https://twitter.com/NIGEL_HAYES/statuses/787070819906293760">October 14, 2016</a></blockquote><br />In a<a href="http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/17844994/want-help-future-student-athletes"> </a><a href="http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/17844994/want-help-future-student-athletes">subsequent interview with ESPN,</a> Hayes said that while he wasn't "broke" himself, he wanted his sign to speak for athletes who are, and provoke public debate. Talaya says she had no idea Nigel was going to protest—not until she saw it online. She was proud of her son, in part because she agreed with him. "It's a business, and the players are already working at the college level," she says. "They're just not getting paid. And Nigel's not this single-parent child who's so poor and trying to make it to the NBA and yadda yadda yadda. We're not rich, but we do fine."<br /><br />On Twitter, a picture of Hayes holding his sign went viral. It wasn't his first time using social media to make a broader point. Ever since his former AAU basketball coach, Quentin Rogers, gave him a copy of <i>The Autobiography of Malcolm X,</i> Hayes has been an ardent reader of books and articles about the Civil Rights movement and African-American history; last summer, the background photo on his Twitter page was a drawing that included the faces of W.E.B. Du Bois, Marcus Garvey, Martin Luther King, Paul Robeson, Huey P. Newton, and Malcolm X.<br /><br />After protests erupted in Charlotte last September over the shooting death of Keith Lamont Scott by police, Hayes wrote a series of more than 40 tweets about race in America, expressing anguish over inequality and police violence and debating some of his followers:<br /><br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">Racism towards black people isn<br />— Nigel Hayes (@NIGEL_HAYES) <a href="https://twitter.com/NIGEL_HAYES/statuses/778730636529967104">September 21, 2016</a></blockquote><br /><br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">No they don<br />— Nigel Hayes (@NIGEL_HAYES) <a href="https://twitter.com/NIGEL_HAYES/statuses/778739056683343873">September 21, 2016</a></blockquote><br /><br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">Put yourself in the position to...<br />-Have your car stall?<br />-Have your hands up? <br />-Grab wallet when told?<br />-Be black? <a href="https://www.blogger.com/%3C/p">— Nigel Hayes (@NIGEL_HAYES) </a><a href="https://twitter.com/NIGEL_HAYES/statuses/778787058248810497">September 22, 2016</a></blockquote><br /><br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">To White America, black athletes should only entertain. Once they speak on social issues, they<br />— Nigel Hayes (@NIGEL_HAYES) <a href="https://twitter.com/NIGEL_HAYES/statuses/778803872311615488">September 22, 2016</a></blockquote><br />In October, two fans at a Wisconsin football game wore Halloween costumes <a href="https://twitter.com/NIGEL_HAYES/status/792537292225318912" target="_blank">depicting President Obama with a noose around his neck</a>. Neither was asked to leave Camp Randall Stadium, and while school administrators later criticized the outfits, they defended the right to wear them. According to <i>Inside Higher Ed</i>, this came after three other bigoted incidents on campus: a student taping swastikas and photographs of Hitler on the door of a Jewish student's room; three students disrupting an event about Native American sexual assault victims with "war cry" yells; and someone slipping a note reading "Fuck you nigger bitch" under the door of a biracial student.<br /><br />Hayes again took to Twitter, this time to share a statement from himself and other Wisconsin athletes of color. He and teammate Jordan Hill also stood a step behind his teammates while the national anthem was played during some of the Badgers' early season games—a gesture Hayes said was inspired by NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, and intended to bring awareness to unequal treatment of African-Americans.<br /><br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">As a student, I demand change from <a href="https://www.blogger.com/%3C/p">— Nigel Hayes (@NIGEL_HAYES) </a><a href="https://twitter.com/NIGEL_HAYES/statuses/795795295795875840">November 8, 2016</a></blockquote><br />"A lot of people don't think racism exists," Hayes says. "One guy tweeted at me, 'What are you talking about, blacks and whites are treated the same.' People actually believe that. So my job is to be like, 'Nah, dawg, look at this laundry list of things that show you the injustices.' People don't believe, so I go, 'OK, look at these facts.'<br /><br />"You can't dispute facts. It's up to you whether you want to read or believe them. But facts don't care whether you believe. It's like the sun being yellow. You can believe all you want that it's green. It's yellow."<br /><br />If it seems that Hayes wears two different activist hats—NCAA economics by day, America's ongoing legacy of racial prejudice by night—well, he disagrees. There's a connection, he says. And you don't have to squint very hard to see it. Revenue sport college athletes like him are predominantly black. Coaches and administrators are overwhelmingly white. The latter group makes the rules, and controls all of the money.<br /><br />Critics (<a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports">myself included</a>) have argued that ostensibly colorblind regulations prohibiting athlete pay are anything but, essentially transferring large amounts of wealth from poor, young, and black laborers to rich, older, and white managers. In public opinion polls, a majority of whites are opposed to pay-for-play; a majority of blacks support it. Recent academic research suggests that<a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/does-racial-resentment-fuel-opposition-to-paying-college-athletes"> </a><a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/does-racial-resentment-fuel-opposition-to-paying-college-athletes">racial resentment is one of the main factors fueling white resistance</a> to compensating student-athletes. Branch famously wrote that campus sports carry "an unmistakable whiff of the plantation." Bohannon, who is white, agrees. "People will bash me for saying this because of who I am and coming from a school like Wisconsin, but the system is inherently regressive and structurally racist," he says. "No matter how you look at it."<br /><br />In both federal court and the court of public opinion, the NCAA and its defenders long have asserted that paying athletes will somehow compromise their educations. There's no actual evidence for this. Nevertheless, the appellate judges who upheld the key ruling in the <i>O'Bannon </i>case—that the NCAA and its member schools are violating antitrust law by limiting player compensation—also decreed that any compensation should be tethered to educational expenses, just because.<br /><br />In turn, this could affect how <i>Jenkins</i> plays out. For legal reasons, Hayes can't publicly comment on the case. But when he thinks about college sports in general, he can't help but wonder if the notion that paying athletes will cripple them in the classroom doesn't carry a familiar, disturbing whiff.<br /><br />"The majority of players—and the marquee ones—are black," Hayes says. "You can't trust them with money? It's an insult to athletes' intelligence and maturity levels, saying we don't have enough responsibility to have money, focus, and still study.<br /><br />"It's stupid, too. Like there's no such thing as a working student. [Other students] make a couple dollars for their local restaurant. They go to class and can get paid. I work out for five to six hours a day, and I make millions for the school. I go to class and <i>can't</i> get paid? That's ridiculous. Why is that even an argument?"<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1301px" data-original-width="1955px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/03/16/nigel-hayes-tk-body-image-1489681576.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">NCAA president Mark Emmert enjoys a generous compensation package. Photo by Robert Deutsch-USA TODAY Sports</div><strong><br /></strong> <strong>Before the 2015 Final Four,</strong> Hayes and his teammates taped a television segment with sportscaster Jim Nantz. At one point, an older, white-haired man entered the room, and began shaking hands with everyone. <i>Who is that?</i> Hayes asked.<br /><i><br /></i> <i>Mark Emmert</i>, he was told.<br /><br />Hayes chuckled to himself. What could he say, really, to the NCAA's most prominent executive? <i>Nice to meet you. I'm suing you. But nice to meet you.</i> "I think [Emmert] smiled," Hayes says, recalling their handshake. "[The lawsuit] wasn't something at that point of time where he wanted to go."<br /><br />Was it awkward?<br /><br />"I can't feel awkward about standing up for what's right."<br /><br />Perhaps not. Still, standing up is hard work. It can be wearying. In March of 2015, Hayes<a href="http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/wisconsins-nigel-hayes-let-schools-decide-how-much-to-pay-players/"> </a><a href="http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/wisconsins-nigel-hayes-let-schools-decide-how-much-to-pay-players/">gave a deposition in the </a><a href="http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/wisconsins-nigel-hayes-let-schools-decide-how-much-to-pay-players/"><i>Jenkins</i></a><a href="http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/wisconsins-nigel-hayes-let-schools-decide-how-much-to-pay-players/"> case before NCAA lawyers</a>. He said that individual schools should be free to decide how much to pay revenue-sport athletes, and that allowing them to do so would make players "better off." The next night, Wisconsin played a game at Minnesota. Sixteen days later, the Badgers opened play in the NCAA tournament.<br /><br />"If you think about everything Nigel does, he does a lot more than most adults do," Talaya Davis says. "The workouts on his own, the school time in class, the practices, the rehab, the community service, the studying for tests. I don't know where he finds the time for anything else.<br /><br />"We talk every day, and sometimes when we're on the phone, he's reading [a book] or on his iPad," Davis laughs. "And I know it!"<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="2520px" data-original-width="1914px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/03/16/nigel-hayes-tk-body-image-1489679963.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">When the pressure is on. Photo by Mary Langenfeld-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />When Hayes first joined the <i>Jenkins</i> suit, Wisconsin's athletic department released a statement expressing support for him as "a student and team member," but also reiterating that the school did not believe in the "professionalization of intercollegiate athletics." For the last two years, Hayes has occupied a weird, dissonant space: of college sports but apart from them; playing for his school while confronting it; chasing championships in the NCAA's premier cash-cow event while saying <i>no mas.&nbsp;</i><br /><br />In return, fans have called him selfish, misinformed, and ungrateful.<a href="http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketball/news/nigel-hayes-ncaa-protest-pay-for-play-student-athletes-amateurism-cost-of-attendance-duane-wilson-marquette/1cyrcj7n39pkz1njtdj74u0wji"> </a><a href="http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketball/news/nigel-hayes-ncaa-protest-pay-for-play-student-athletes-amateurism-cost-of-attendance-duane-wilson-marquette/1cyrcj7n39pkz1njtdj74u0wji">Marquette guard Duane Wilson ripped</a> Hayes' <i>Gameday </i>protest as "corny and sad," said he was "blessed to get a free education," and suggested Hayes only did it to get "social media attention."<br /><br />Does it get to Hayes? He won't say. It's easy to forget that he's still a young man, and still very much trying to figure things out. He's not far removed from the 20-year-old who whispered to Kaminsky, "God, she's beautiful" about a stenographer at an NCAA tournament press conference, only to bury his face in his hands after realizing his microphone was live. And he's not far removed from the high school senior who missed exactly one of 45 basketball team morning shootarounds—and, according to his coach, "was angry at himself the whole year."<br /><div class="responsive-wrapper youtube-wrapper"><iframe allowfullscreen="" data-original-height="480px" data-original-width="853px" frameborder="0" height="100%" mozallowfullscreen="" scrolling="no" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/LlNpVFxQUtE" webkitallowfullscreen="" width="100%"></iframe>Last summer, Hayes typed up a list of personal goals: athletics, academics, and community service. Enough items to almost fill an 8-by-11-inch sheet of paper. He placed a checkbox next to each one, printed out multiple copies, and posted the list in his locker, on his refrigerator, and on his bedroom wall—the better to see it upon waking up. According to his mother, the actual items are secret, though Hayes himself has admitted that winning an NCAA title and "doing everything I can on and off the court to be the greatest Badger basketball player of all time" are among them.</div><br />Hayes is used to achieving just about anything he puts his mind to. When he was failing a 300-level finance course, he crammed for the final during the NBA combine, working around interviews and drills, and then aced the test. "I found about that when I read about it," Talaya Davis says. "I was like, <i>What?</i>" During the summer heading into his sophomore season at Wisconsin, he woke up every day before 5 AM to work on his jump shot; after connecting on just 58 percent of his free throws and not attempting a single three-pointer as a freshman, he upped his foul shooting by 17 percentage points and made 35 of 92 triples. Spend time on Wisconsin's campus, and you may see a poster with a picture of Hayes reading<i> The Autobiography of Malcolm X</i>, part of a university library literacy program.<br /><br />Hayes was a first-team All-Big Ten performer as a junior. This season, he was named to the all-conference third team. The Badgers are a No. 8 seed in the NCAA tournament, and will be hard-pressed to match the postseason success of Hayes' first three years: Final Four, national runner-up, Sweet Sixteen. Both he and his team have been inconsistent. "He didn't have quite as good a season he could have hoped for," Bohannon says. "I think that put a burden on him."<br /><br />Did Hayes' advocacy add to that burden? It's possible. Basketball is difficult enough; only one school wins a title each season. Meanwhile, <i>nobody</i> has ever upended NCAA amateurism. "I felt [that pressure] when I spoke out," Bohannon says. "You're not going to make any change. So just shut up, and go play."<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="833px" data-original-width="1332px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/03/16/nigel-hayes-tk-body-image-1489679725.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Nigel Hayes is a fan favorite. So why rock the boat? Photo by Mary Langenfeld-USA TODAY Sports</div><strong><br /></strong> <strong>Back at Big Ten media day, </strong>Hayes won't shut up. He's rolling now, holding court. <i>Student-athlete?</i> Not the correct term, he says. No such thing.<br /><br />Basketball schedules are made for television networks. Travel is work. Money dictates everything. Wisconsin's contingent came to Washington on a private jet, and the only reason Hayes is here in the first place—closer to the Atlantic Ocean than the Big Ten's traditional Midwestern home—is that the conference added the University of Maryland during a recent expansion, the better to introduce its eponymous television network into the large and lucrative D.C. market.<br /><br />"We're here for sports, and sports alone," he says. "Especially a basketball player. You're here to win games. And in the meantime, if you want to go to class, you can."<br /><br />Hayes isn't wrong. But that's not the mythology the NCAA sells. And it's not what anyone—fans, coaches, federal judges, <a href="http://edworkforce.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=401255">even Republican members of Congress</a>—wants to hear. "A lot of people gave Nigel flak," Bohannon says. "Like, 'Nigel needs to be quiet and just worry about this season. He has a lot to play for. He won't be able to play in the NBA if he keeps taking these stands.' Well, why are these things mutually exclusive?"<br /><br />Hayes has nothing to gain from the <i>Jenkins </i>suit. It will outlast his college career—and besides, it seeks an injunction against player compensation limits, not damages for previous harm. If the plaintiffs win, future college athletes may get paid. Hayes won't. "When people start complaining that he is greedy and selfish, I don't even know that they're taking about," Talaya Davis says.<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1084px" data-original-width="1440px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/03/16/nigel-hayes-tk-body-image-1489680669.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Nigel Hayes with his mother, Talaya Davis, and stepfather, Albert Davis, Sr. Photo by Mary Langenfeld-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />In a way, Hayes seems like the least likely person to take on the NCAA. He loves playing basketball. He's damn good at it. He loves being a student, too, and has spent the last four years expanding his mind—becoming, as he jokes, <i>woke. </i>He's everything a campus athlete is supposed to be. Only that's the thing: anyone willing to study and learn can figure out that something is amiss, and that economic exploitation dressed up in a cap and gown is still wrong. The irony of the big-time college sports system isn't that it helped to produce someone as self-aware as Nigel Hayes; it's that it generally fails to produce more people like him.<br /><br />"This is amateur sports, right?" Hayes says. "Then why does Coach have a $10 million contract? If he's an amateur coach for an amateur sport, why does he get paid and I don't?"<br /><br />On it goes. The more Hayes talks, the more it becomes clear: he can't help himself. He knows he's right, and he wants to share. Why bother? Simple. Keeping quiet would be <i>harder. </i><br /><br />Pay the players, Hayes says. Lots of coaches agree. They just don't say so out loud, for the same reason many professional athletes don't sound off about social issues. Dollars and sponsorships. Too much to lose.<br /><br />Fortunately for Hayes, he doesn't have that problem. "In my case, as an NCAA athlete, you can't fine me," he says, flashing another small smile. "You can't take my money."<br /><br /><b><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/nigel-hayes-is-playing-in-march-madness-and-taking-on-ncaa-amateurism-in-federal-court" target="_blank">Read the original article at VICE Sports</a></b>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-28681530487874634502017-03-07T09:38:00.004-05:002017-03-07T09:38:40.210-05:00The Color of Money<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Z7cEkbn1NB0/WL7F3KYtbLI/AAAAAAAADtY/U1N8rQQOfN83WjzkXv9WwTldrLn6-wcYACLcB/s1600/does-racial-resentment-fuel-opposition-to-paying-college-athletes-1488815902.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Z7cEkbn1NB0/WL7F3KYtbLI/AAAAAAAADtY/U1N8rQQOfN83WjzkXv9WwTldrLn6-wcYACLcB/s1600/does-racial-resentment-fuel-opposition-to-paying-college-athletes-1488815902.jpg" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Does racial resentment fuel opposition to paying college athletes?</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | March 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">A</span>s a political scientist, Tatishe Nteta studies how racial resentment affects attitudes toward public policy. But it took Colin Cowherd for him to realize that the same dynamic also might be influencing the ongoing debate over paying college athletes.<br /><br />It was the spring of 2014, and Nteta, a professor at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, was listening to sports talk radio while driving to work. Cowherd, then an ESPN host, was discussing a federal antitrust lawsuit brought by former University of California, Los Angeles basketball star Ed O'Bannon against the National Collegiate Athletic Association—a much-publicized case that sought to allow past and present campus athletes to be compensated for the use of their names, images, and likeness.<br /><br />"I don't think paying all college athletes is great, not every college is loaded and most 19-year-olds [are] gonna spend it—and let's be honest, they're gonna spend it on weed and kicks," Cowherd said. "And spare me the 'they're being extorted' thing.<br /><br />"Listen, 90 percent of these college guys are gonna spend it on tats, weed, kicks, Xboxes, beer and swag. They are, get over it!"<br /><div class="read-more"><br /></div><i>Weed and kicks.</i> <i>Tats and swag.</i> To Nteta's ears, this sounded familiar, like the coded language sometimes used by politicians to indirectly talk about race. "To be fair to Cowherd, he didn't explicitly racialize this," Nteta says. "He simply said college athletes. But from the blowback he got from civil rights groups, it was clear that he was talking about young black men."<br /><br />This piqued Nteta's curiosity. In politics, researchers know that negative racial attitudes can impact support for government initiatives like health care and welfare. For example, if you're white, and you believe that African-Americans tend to be, say, lazy, and you <i>also</i> think a particular program is likely to benefit blacks, you're far more likely to oppose that program.<br /><br />"So the question was," Nteta says, "does race play a role in opposition to or support for this overarching issue of paying college athletes?"<br /><br />Two and a half years later, Nteta and his colleagues have done enough work to produce a tentative answer: <i>Yes. </i>When it comes to arguments over NCAA amateurism, race definitely seems to matter.<br />How so? In<a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1065912916685186"> a study recently published in </a><a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1065912916685186"><i>Political Research Quarterly</i></a>, Nteta and fellow professors Kevin Wallsten and Lauren McCarthy analyzed responses to public opinion survey questions from 2014 and additional follow-up polling, and concluded that:<br /><br />* Whites were more likely than blacks to oppose college athlete pay-for-play.<br /><br />* Harboring negative racial views about blacks was the single strongest predictor of white opposition to paying athletes—more important than age, education level, political affiliation, sports fandom, or even if respondents had played college sports themselves.<br /><br />* The more negatively white respondents felt about blacks, the more they opposed pay-for-play.<br /><br />* Racially resentful whites who were primed to think about African-American athletes before answering questions were more likely to oppose paying athletes than racially resentful whites who were primed to think about white athletes.<br /><br />"It's not race and only race," Nteta says. "There are a number of reasons why people will support or oppose policy options here. But race can't be divorced from the story. Race is one of the central reasons why whites are opposed to pay-for-play."<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1079px" data-original-width="1619px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/03/06/does-racial-resentment-fuel-opposition-to-paying-college-athletes-body-image-1488815017.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Happy to cheer athletes, so long as those athletes aren't being paid? Photo by Steve Mitchell-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />At first glance, that conclusion may seem counterintuitive. Off-base. Even offensive. After all, the players in big-time college football and men's basketball—the two sports at the center of pay-for-play arguments—are predominantly African-American. And they're <i>popular. </i>Majority white fan bases tune in to their broadcasts, buy tickets to their games, and loudly cheer for their performances; they wear replica jerseys essentially celebrating black athletic excellence. Where, exactly, is the racial animus?<br /><br />Nteta has a more nuanced view. His father, a professor of African-American history at the University of Massachusetts, Boston, left South Africa in the 1960s to attend divinity school in the United States. He became involved with the international anti-apartheid movement, and after working to pressure Harvard University and Polaroid to divest from South Africa in the 1970s, he was exiled by his home country. "The intersection between race and politics has sort of defined my family's history," Nteta says.<br /><br />The same intersection defines much of Nteta's professional work. Decades of social science research have found that there are strong differences of opinion between whites and blacks on policies that seem race-neutral—think opposition to gun control laws, or support for harsher law enforcement—and that some of those splits can be explained in part by negative attitudes toward African-Americans. The textbook example, Nteta says, is white opposition to welfare prior to 1990s federal reform. "It was best explained by negative attitudes toward blacks," he says. "Even when you took into account every other explanation—like you don't want to pay taxes for welfare, or don't think people deserve a handout—none of these things explained it statistically as well as racial animus.<br /><br />"What [researchers] found is that when whites thought about welfare, the first picture they had [in their minds] was a black welfare queen, and that this person was stealing from hardworking Americans, who in the perceptions of most folks are white. It turned out those perceptions colored the way people responded to any question about the expansion of welfare."<br /><br />Perception is key. As studied and defined by social scientists, "racial resentment" is not the same thing as traditional racism. The latter—used to justify both South African apartheid and American slavery and Jim Crow—is rooted in a belief that blacks are genetically inferior to whites. By contrast, the former is "not outright hatred, but negative views about blacks justified by a belief that other races don't share the values of my group," Nteta says. "It's like when [FOX News host] Bill O'Reilly said on his radio show that he went to dinner with [African-American television host and civil rights activist] Al Sharpton in Harlem and it was just like any other restaurant, with people being respectful and eating their food."<br /><br />Nteta laughs. "As if that was a surprise."<br /><br />After hearing Cowherd, Nteta and his colleagues looked at previous public opinion polls on college sports. When it came to pay-for-play, they showed a clear racial divide. A 2014 <i>Washington Post</i>/ABC News poll found that 51 percent of non-whites favored paying campus athletes, while only 24 percent of whites agreed; similarly, 66 percent of non-whites supported athlete unionization, compared to 38 percent of whites. A 2015 HBO <i>Real Sports</i>/Marist poll found that 59 percent of African-Americans believed college athletes should be paid; by contrast, 74 percent of whites believed the opposite.<br /><br />How to explain the split? Nteta and company knew from NCAA demographic data that blacks made up the largest share of athletes in Division I college football (47 percent in 2013-14) and men's basketball (58 percent), the two highest-profile campus sports. The numbers in the six largest athletic conferences from 2007-11 were even higher, with African-Americans accounting for 57 percent of football players and 64 percent of men's basketball players. If whites perceived young black men to be the primary beneficiaries of pay-for-play, and if those same whites <i>also</i> harbored negative attitudes toward African-Americans in general, then perhaps college athletics and public policy had more in common than anyone realized.<br /><br />"Whenever you see those kinds of splits, you know there may be a place for blacks' self-interest and whites' racial resentment," Nteta says.<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="897px" data-original-width="1346px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/03/06/does-racial-resentment-fuel-opposition-to-paying-college-athletes-body-image-1488814787.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Racial resentment plays a role in our political divides. What about college sports? Photo by Tommy Gilligan-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />That was the theory. To test it, Nteta, Wallsten, and McCarthy came up with a short series of questions about people's feelings toward the NCAA and college athletes, what schools they had received their undergraduate degrees from, their interest in college sports, if they had been college athletes themselves, and whether they agreed or disagreed that college athletes should receive salaries in addition to their scholarships. The researchers also selected three questions used by political scientists to measure racial resentment among whites:<br /><br />* Do you support the statement "the Irish, Italians, Jews, and many other minorities overcame prejudice, and worked their way up. Blacks should do the same without any special favors"?<br /><br />* Do you agree with the statement "it is really a matter of some people not trying hard enough; if blacks would only try harder, they could be as well-off as whites"?<br /><br />* Do you agree with the statement "generations of slavery and discrimination have created conditions that make it difficult for blacks to work their way out of the lower class"?<br /><br />The questions were added to a portion of the 2014 Cooperative Congressional Election Study, an online public opinion poll conducted by YouGov before and after the midterm elections. Analyzing responses from 1,000 survey recipients—674 of them self-identifying as white—Nteta and his colleagues found that nearly 58 percent of whites opposed paying college athletes.<br /><br />That wasn't a surprise. What <i>was</i> surprising were the nitty-gritty correlations. Sentiment toward the NCAA had no statistically significant effect on how whites felt about pay-for-play, nor did sentiment toward college athletes. Identifying as a Democrat or a Republican didn't matter. Neither did political ideology. Higher interest in campus sports actually dovetailed with <i>increased</i> support for athlete compensation.<br /><br />Meanwhile, racial resentment was the strongest predictor of opposition to pay-for-play—the more resentful whites were, the less they supported it. The finding was clear, but two questions remained. First, were white respondents thinking of African-Americans when they thought about college athletes? Second, "the problem was that even though you find racial resentment matters, you couldn't dismiss the reverse causation argument," Nteta says. "You can say negative attitudes towards blacks influence opinions on pay, but someone else can say that opinions on pay are actually influencing opinions on blacks."<br /><br />To address those issues, the researchers conducted a second online survey last spring through Amazon's Mechanical Turk. In the new poll, the pay-for-play question was accompanied by one of two images of college athletes: either an "all white faces" treatment of three head shots of young white men in athletic uniforms, or a "mixed faces" treatment featuring two of the same white faces and one African-American face.<br /><br />Nteta and his colleagues found that whites with low levels of racial resentment who saw the "mixed faces" treatment were generally supportive of pay-for-play—but whites with high resentment levels who saw the same treatment were strongly opposed. Moreover, the gap between those groups was bigger than the one between high and low-resentment level whites who saw the "all white faces" treatment.<br /><br />"The idea is that if race matters, then randomly assigning or priming people to think about white athletes and black athletes while giving them the same question will make people have different levels of opposition to paying them," Nteta says. "And that's what we found."<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1344px" data-original-width="1930px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/03/06/does-racial-resentment-fuel-opposition-to-paying-college-athletes-body-image-1488814544.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">In a study, racially resentful whites who were primed with images of black athletes were more likely to oppose pay-for-play. Photo by Kevin Jairaj-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />What does this mean for college sports? In some ways, Nteta's work seems to fit a bigger picture. Many observers and critics—<a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports">including yours truly</a>—have described the NCAA's amateur economy as both<a href="http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2011/04/the-ncaa-as-a-powerful-cartel-becker.html"> </a><a href="http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2011/04/the-ncaa-as-a-powerful-cartel-becker.html">regressive</a> and<a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/01/08/college-sports-exploits-unpaid-black-athletes-but-they-could-force-a-change/"> </a><a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/01/08/college-sports-exploits-unpaid-black-athletes-but-they-could-force-a-change/">structurally racist</a>, a system that annually transfers billions of dollars of wealth from poorer, predominantly black football and men's basketball players and their families to better-off, predominantly white coaches, administrators, and non-revenue-sport athletes. Pulitzer Prize-winning civil rights historian Taylor Branch has written that college sports exude "an unmistakable whiff of the plantation." Former NCAA executive director Walter Byers, who built the organization and ran it for decades, wrote in his memoir that campus athletes were characterized by a "neo-plantation mentality" in which the economic rewards "belong to the overseers." The compensation rules are ostensibly color-blind, but the end results are not.<br /><br />Perhaps that helps explain the racial divide in public support for amateurism, and why whites are more likely to support the status quo. Former Northwestern University quarterback Kain Colter says he saw something similar when he spearheaded an attempt to unionize the school's football team in 2014.<br /><br />At first, Colter says, almost all of his teammates supported the effort, but as time went on—and both the school and the team's coaching staff expressed opposition to unionization—support began to fracture. As reported in the book <i>Indentured: The Inside Story of the Rebellion Against the NCAA</i>, black players largely remained committed to the cause. White players largely did not.<br /><br />Colter doesn't believe his white teammates harbored any overt racial resentment, but he can't help but wonder if socio-economic factors associated with race didn't play a part in the split. After all, the union drive wasn't explicitly about pay-for-play; to the contrary, its stated bargaining goals were better health insurance, enhanced safety protocols, and more time away from football for academics.<br /><br />"Maybe it was more of a class thing, and an affluence thing," Colter says. "Maybe some players won't ever have to worry about medical coverage, or some of the other concerns that kids from lower-income neighborhoods and family situations do have to worry about.<br /><br />"I got a lot more support from the black community. Look at the makeup of the revenue sports. Look at it from a statistical, objective standpoint. African-Americans dominate. We're talking about all this money created by all these athletes. Once you start addressing these things, it's probably going to hit home more with them.<br /><br />"If the situation was flipped—three percent of white kids on an all-black campus, and they're the revenue sports producers—then whites would probably notice some things, too."<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1656px" data-original-width="2485px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/03/06/does-racial-resentment-fuel-opposition-to-paying-college-athletes-body-image-1488815689.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Former Northwestern quarterback Kain Colter (right). Photo by Geoff Burke-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Nteta is confident in his group's findings. That said, he's the first to admit that social science can be fuzzy and inexact, particularly when it comes to race. People lie on surveys—respondents with negative racial beliefs don't want to be seen as racist. Moreover, there's vigorous debate among academics about how to measure racial resentment, with some researchers arguing that studies conflate and confuse negative views of African-Americans with color-blind conservative principles and policy preferences. <br /><br />(Indeed, much of Nteta and company's paper focuses on college sports pay-for-play as an ideal test case for detecting racial resentment. Because the NCAA is a private entity and athletes work for what they receive from their schools, attitudes toward amateurism shouldn't be tangled up with conservative distaste for government and wealth redistribution. "You can't say there are two worlds on this issue between Democrats and Republicans," Nteta says. "We are in such a hyper-partisan environment, but you don't see differences based on partisanship on compensating athletes.")<br /><br />Besides race, Nteta's research found that only two other factors were statistically significant when predicting white opinion about college sports amateurism. The older whites were, the more likely they were to oppose pay-for-play; the more educated they were, the same. Resistance to compensating athletes was particularly strong among whites who attended a school in a Power Five major football conference—a finding that took Nteta by surprise, and makes him wonder if there are other types of resentment at work.<br /><br />"Imagine if you go to Alabama, and you see treatment of the football players, and you are just a struggling student trying to get your tuition payment in on time," he says. "Folks who have high levels of educational attainment are also really cognizant of the costs of that education—educational debt has replaced credit card debt as the central debt that the majority of Americans have to deal with.<br /><br />"So maybe if you're someone who has hundreds of thousands of dollars in college debt, you feel athletes are not respecting the worth and importance of a scholarship. 'They want to get paid on top of a free ride that I didn't have? That's an affront to everything I did at school.' We don't have data to support that, but we think that might be playing out."<br /><br />To get more data—and to better understand how racial resentment and other factors influence attitudes toward play-for-play—Nteta and his colleagues included a larger set of questions on a 2016 election survey, information they are just beginning to analyze. Ultimately, he says, the goal is not to reduce everything to race, or to call people like Cowherd racists. Rather, it's to help both the public and college sports decision-makers see their own possible biases, unwitting and otherwise, so they can better evaluate the fundamental fairness of the NCAA's economic system.<br /><br />"Until we recognize that one of the reasons there's opposition to paying college athletes is because of negative views of the group that is seen as benefitting, we will never be able to have an adult conversation about the real, true merits of the policy," Nteta says. "If we sweep race under the rug, we will never get to a place where we can have a real debate."<br /><br /><b><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/does-racial-resentment-fuel-opposition-to-paying-college-athletes" target="_blank">Read the original article at VICE Sports</a></b>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-25094629919092684202017-02-01T09:28:00.000-05:002017-03-07T09:32:21.133-05:00National Scamming Day<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1Tv6fnkeupo/WL7EYor-NTI/AAAAAAAADtQ/RDKvGRYXskArFRcSXajNRVkyLxXt15SZgCLcB/s1600/why-top-ncaa-recruits-shouldnt-sign-national-letters-of-intent-1485962268.jpg" imageanchor="1" ><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-1Tv6fnkeupo/WL7EYor-NTI/AAAAAAAADtQ/RDKvGRYXskArFRcSXajNRVkyLxXt15SZgCLcB/s1600/why-top-ncaa-recruits-shouldnt-sign-national-letters-of-intent-1485962268.jpg" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Why top NCAA recruits shouldn't sign national letters of intent</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | February 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">T</span>he hometown gym was packed. The never-worn hat was ready. ESPNU<a href="http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhygXafSjzk"> </a><a href="http://https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhygXafSjzk">was broadcasting live.</a> It was February 2015, and Roquan Smith, a blue-chip prep linebacker from Georgia, was preparing to announce his college choice on national signing day—the annual day-turned-television jamboree in which hundreds of high school recruits sign their National Letters of Intent, contracts that bind them to their future football programs.<br /><br />With family and friends behind him and homemade placards featuring the names of four schools—Texas A&amp;M, Michigan, Georgia, and the University of California, Los Angeles—arrayed on a table in front of him, Smith smiled for the camera. Thanked God. Had a buddy remove two of the placards to gin up some suspense. Reaching into a bag, he slipped on a pair of multicolored gloves, then held them aloft to signify his selection: UCLA. Onlookers cheered. Smith, per tradition, put on a Bruins ball cap. As far as school-choice ceremonies go, nothing was out of the ordinary. Except for one thing.<br /><br />Smith<a href="http://https//www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/sports/ncaafootball/high-school-recruits-think-twice-about-signing-letters-of-intent.html?_r=0"> </a><a href="http://https//www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/sports/ncaafootball/high-school-recruits-think-twice-about-signing-letters-of-intent.html?_r=0">never actually signed a letter.</a><br /><br />With national signing day once again upon us, here's some advice for the country's top high school football players: follow Smith's lead. Throw a party. Pick a hat. Enjoy some on-air shine. But absolutely, positively do not sign a National Letter of Intent (or NLI). No pen, no paper, no whirring fax machine. If you're an elite talent, you don't <i>need</i> to sign a letter of intent to receive an athletic scholarship. A basic financial aid agreement with the school of your choice will do.<br /><br />More to the point, you'll be putting your signature on what Andy Staples of <i>Sports Illustrated</i> rightly calls<a href="http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/02/09/national-letter-intent-punt-pass-pork"> </a><a href="http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/02/09/national-letter-intent-punt-pass-pork">"the worst contract in America"</a>—a one-sided agreement that snuffs out your bargaining leverage, doesn't fully guarantee you a scholarship, and could put you and your family in a major bind if you happen to change your minds between now and the start of the college preseason.<br /><br />Created by a group of college athletic conferences in the mid-1960s, NLIs were intended to make recruiting more orderly. At the time, programs were poaching athletes from one another even after they had enrolled in classes; athletes were deluged with offers and attention throughout their senior years.<br /><br />Enter the NLI. By signing the letter, an athlete agrees to attend a particular school; in return, the school agrees to give that player an athletic scholarship. In theory, this is all well and good. Athletes and institutions both desire certainty—coaches don't want to scramble at the last minute to fill roster holes when oft-mercurial teenagers decide to play somewhere else, and players don't want to spend months wondering if there's a really a spot for them at the university of their choice.<br /><br />Handshake understandings are nice, but they're not especially rock-ribbed. In January, the University of Connecticut<a href="http://deadspin.com/report-uconn-dicks-recruit-over-pulls-scholarship-two-1791288449"> </a><a href="http://deadspin.com/report-uconn-dicks-recruit-over-pulls-scholarship-two-1791288449">reportedly reneged on a verbal scholarship offer</a> to high school linebacker Ryan Dickens, who was recruited by since-fired coach Bob Diaco. A written contract means both sides can breathe a little easier. No more recruiting phone calls. No more guessing. Players can enjoy their springs and summers. Coaches can start rearranging their depth charts. Everyone wins, because everyone knows the score.<br /><br />"The original intent of the letter is valid," says Warren Zola, a sports law expert and Boston College professor. "A school offers a spot for a player, it comes with a scholarship, you want some level of commitment from both sides, and this piece of paper offers that. The problem is that they are preposterously one-sided."<br /><br />Are they ever. Take a look at the standard NLI language and provisions, and one thing becomes clear: the boilerplate agreement requires athletes to give up a lot, but asks schools to surrender very little. How so? Upon signing, players forfeit their right to be recruited by other schools. If they change their minds and enroll at another school, they have to sit out a season of competition and lose another year of eligibility. Athletes can be released from NLIs, but only if schools—and in the real world, that means coaches—agree to it.<br /><br />Meanwhile, athletic departments are required to make good on their promise of a one-year athletic scholarship—that is, unless an athlete isn't admitted to a school in the first place, which can always happen after they've signed their NLI.<br /><br />"It's the ultimate out," says Marc Isenberg, a California-based athlete advocate and author of <i>Money Players: A Guide to Succeed in Sports, Business &amp; Life for Current and Future Pro Athletes.</i> "Schools can say to any player, 'Well, sorry, you didn't get in. You didn't fit the academic profile of the students we're admitting.' Think of how subjective that is. Suppose I'm a coach. How easy would it be, if I decide I can do better giving a scholarship to another player, to just not push for one of my recruits to be admitted?"<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1399px" data-original-width="913px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/02/01/why-top-ncaa-recruits-shouldnt-sign-national-letters-of-intent-body-image-1485962408.jpg?output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">When you love America, and also preposterously one-sided labor contracts. Photo by RVR Photos-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Defenders of the NLI system contend that it works well enough. The NCAA claims that of the more than 36,000 athletes who signed letters in 2011,<a href="http://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/2011-02-02/history-national-letter-intent"> </a><a href="http://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/2011-02-02/history-national-letter-intent">only 700 asked for releases</a>—and just 30 of those requests weren't eventually granted by university athletic directors. On the other hand, <i>well enough </i>isn't the same as<i> fair, </i>and the asymmetric nature of the contract means athletes can be hung out to dry.<br /><br />To wit: NLIs explicitly state that athletes are signing with schools, not particular coaches. In reality, though, coaches play a huge role in recruiting; the close relationships players develop with them, especially assistant coaches, are often a major part of why they choose certain schools. Yet it's hardly uncommon for those same coaches to jump ship for better jobs shortly after locking up recruiting classes—leaving those same young men and women feeling like they've been hit with a bait-and-switch.<br /><br />Take Mike Weber, a top high school running back from Detroit who signed with Ohio State in 2015. Weber had been torn between the Buckeyes and archrival Michigan; the night before signing day, Ohio State assistant coach Stan Drayton, whom Weber had grown to trust, r<a href="http://www.cleveland.com/osu/2015/02/stan_drayton_mike_weber_ohio_s.html">eportedly was on the phone with him until almost midnight</a>, assuring him that the Buckeyes were the right choice. "Just being a Michigan kid who is going to graduate with an Ohio State degree and wants to live in his state again," Drayton told<a href="http://cleveland.com/"> </a><a href="http://cleveland.com/">Cleveland.com</a>, recalling the conversation. "He wants to represent Detroit wearing scarlet and gray, and he absolutely can do that. He absolutely will do it. I have a wife from Detroit. I told him, 'If I sit here and coach you and not let you represent Detroit, my wife is probably going to divorce me.'"<br /><br />A day after Weber signed, Drayton divorced the scarlet and gray, taking a job with the Chicago Bears. Weber promptly tweeted, "I'm hurt as hell I ain't gonna lie." Unfortunately for him, NLIs do not contain emotional distress clauses. "Coaches pitch and recruit families based on the relationships they'll have with the player," Zola says. "But far too often, high school students don't realize that if coach leaves, they're not free. For a coach who recruited you and built up that rapport and made all sorts of promises to walk away before you've even played a game, I think that is unfair. <br /><br />"[Basketball coach] Steve Alford leaves New Mexico to go to UCLA, but his son [basketball player Bryce]<a href="http://https//www.abqjournal.com/239289/reports-steve-alford-takes-ucla-coaching-job.html"> </a><a href="http://https//www.abqjournal.com/239289/reports-steve-alford-takes-ucla-coaching-job.html">has to get out of his NLI to follow.</a> [Football coach] Lane Kiffin makes promises to [Tennessee] recruits and then walks away to take another job [at USC]. It's a one-way street."<br /><br />In most cases, schools will do the right and reasonable thing by granting releases to players who want out—as Baylor did last summer, when a group of incoming freshmen got cold feet following the university's disturbing sexual assault scandal. Only here's the problem: schools don't <i>have</i> to do anything. NLIs give them unilateral power.<br /><br />Devonte' Graham discovered this the hard way. A late-blooming high school basketball star from North Carolina, he signed with Appalachian State late in his junior year—mostly because the school had threatened to give his potential scholarship to another player, and Graham felt that<a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/high-school/article66648892.html#storylink=cpy"> </a><a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/high-school/article66648892.html#storylink=cpy">"he wouldn't be able to get anything better."</a> <br /><br />During his senior year, however, Graham raised his level of play. He became a more coveted recruit. Wanting to explore his options, he asked Appalachian State coach Jason Capel for a release. Capel refused. Rather than play for Capel, Graham spent a year at a post-high school prep academy in New Hampshire, hoping the coach would change his mind. He didn't. In fact, it wasn't until Appalachian State replaced Capel with Jim Fox that the school freed Graham to speak with other coaches. He ultimately went to Kansas, where he's currently a starter on a national title contender.<br /><br />"I think the only thing you see outside of college sports that would be comparable to NLIs is non-compete clauses [in employment contracts]," Zola says. "But those are typically negotiated, and there's compensation given for giving up those rights. And even then, the courts will strike them down if they're overly broad. Meanwhile, NLIs are sort of all-encompassing."<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1200px" data-original-width="1800px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/02/01/why-top-ncaa-recruits-shouldnt-sign-national-letters-of-intent-body-image-1485962569.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Mike Weber was contractually locked into his Ohio State commitment, unlike the assistant coach who recruited him. Photo by Mark Henle-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />This is, of course, ironic. The NCAA insists that athletes are simply students who happens to be good at sports, and as such can neither be considered school employees nor allowed to be paid; at the same time, NCAA-administered NLIs subject athletes to restrictions that no other students face, and are more onerous than most employment contracts. For the very best high school athletes, there's a simple solution to the problems that can come with signing a letter: Don't bother.<br /><br />While they don't do much to publicize it, schools can—and do—offer financial aid agreements that contain scholarship guarantees, and also allow athletes to continue talking to other suitors. Last year, receiver Demetris Robinson inked agreements with Georgia, Georgia Tech, and the University of California, Berkeley; he<a href="http://www.si.com/college-football/2016/05/10/demetris-robertson-cal-georgia-recruiting"> didn't decide on Cal until May</a>, well after signing day. This wasn't without risk. All three schools could have moved on, using scholarship slots set aside for the speedy pass catcher on other athletes. Only Robinson, an elite talent, was worth waiting for. <i>Sports Illustrated's </i>Staples estimates that the best 100 to 200 players in each high school football recruiting class have the leverage to follow suit.<br /><br />Isenberg isn't so sure. As a speaker at top high school basketball summer camps, including one held for the top 100 prep recruits by the National Basketball Players' Association, he has explained how NLIs work. "I want to say, 'Don't sign it,'" he says. "It's a shady, one-sided deal. But when it comes down to it, if you're not a McDonald's All-American, a program-changer, you still probably have no choice but to sign."<br /><br />A few years ago, Isenberg says, he found himself advising the family of an elite high school basketball recruit—an athlete being courted by the nation's premier programs, who is now playing professionally. The family was uncomfortable with the NLI, so Isenberg drafted an alternative. In exchange for the athlete's commitment, the letter asked that the school to:<br /><br />• Guarantee a four-year scholarship;<br /><br />• Not bind the athlete to attend the school in the event of a coaching change or NCAA rules violation investigation;<br /><br />• Not require the athlete's parents to co-sign the letter, as is the case with NLI's.<br /><br />Isenberg and the family presented the alternate letter to the coach of a top-five college basketball program. "He listened to us," Isenberg recalls. "And then he said, 'Look, I'm going to the press conference [to announce our recruiting class] tomorrow, and I want to name everybody. If you don't sign [a regular NLI], I might have somebody else waiting in the wings.' That's heady stuff for a 17- or 18-year-old. The pressure is too great."<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1630px" data-original-width="1194px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/02/01/why-top-ncaa-recruits-shouldnt-sign-national-letters-of-intent-body-image-1485962707.jpg?output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Thanks to his NLI, Devonte' Graham's road to Kansas was rockier than necessary. Photo by Jay Biggerstaff-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Like Zola, Isenberg believes that there's a place—and a purpose—for some sort of contract that binds recruits and schools. But both men think the current NLI should be reformed. Zola suggests adding clauses that require schools to adhere to strict time limits on sports activity, allow athletes to work jobs and internships during their off-seasons, and guarantee that they'll cover tuition costs until athletes graduate, regardless of whether they've exhausted their athletic eligibility. Isenberg thinks that if schools decline to admit athletes who already have signed NLIs, they should provide financial reimbursement for the value of those scholarships. "We can come up with a more fair system that reflects reality," he says.<br /><br />Do the NCAA and its member schools <i>want</i> a fairer system? That's an open question. A decade ago, some schools were inserting coaching-change-out clauses into their letters. The <a href="http://www.ncaa.com/news/ncaa/2011-02-02/history-national-letter-intent">association's NLI committee put the kibosh on that practice.</a> Historically, the college sports establishment's attitude toward expanding rights and benefits for athletes has been simple: <i>Hell fucking no. </i>The NCAA fights tooth and nail for amateurism, an arguably illegal system of inarguable economic control; player-friendly reforms such as cost-of-living stipends and the ability to even offer four-year scholarships have come only as a result of legal defeats and public shamings.<br /><br />"Here's the biggest component to all this," Zola says. "Schools have lawyers and conferences and all sorts of people looking out for their best interests. Meanwhile, you have an unsophisticated consumer base of athletes who are ill-prepared to enter this multimillion-dollar business. They're not allowed to have agents. Any level of guidance they get may be deemed to be 'improper benefits.' So you end up with these take-it-or-leave-it contracts."<br /><br />Back to Roquan Smith. On the morning of signing day, he<a href="http://https//www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/sports/ncaafootball/high-school-recruits-think-twice-about-signing-letters-of-intent.html?_r=0"> </a><a href="http://https//www.nytimes.com/2015/02/15/sports/ncaafootball/high-school-recruits-think-twice-about-signing-letters-of-intent.html?_r=0">reportedly woke up undecided</a> between UCLA and Georgia; even after he picked the Bruins on national television, he remained uncertain. At a subsequent lunch with his parents and his high school coach, Larry Harold—who told Smith not to sign anything unless he was absolutely sure of his choice—he received a text message from Georgia coaches: Jeff Ulbrich, the UCLA assistant coach who had recruited Smith for three years, was leaving for the Atlanta Falcons.<br /><br />A few days later, Smith signed a financial aid agreement with Georgia. Not a letter of intent. He still had his signing day party, and still had his moment in the media sun. But in a system that asks athletes to take it, he chose instead to leave. "How clever of the NCAA to create a national celebration around an agreement that's so shady," Isenberg says. "I get celebrating. It's an amazing accomplishment and exciting time. But let's not forget that we're celebrating an agreement that is onerous and draconian. Would the world of college athletics spin off its axis if the players had more flexibility? I don't think so."<br /><br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/why-top-ncaa-recruits-shouldnt-sign-national-letters-of-intent" target="_blank"><b>Read the original article at VICE Sports</b></a>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-59919137955474381382017-01-20T08:40:00.000-05:002017-03-07T08:45:15.953-05:00Make College Sports Great Again<a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MjW5W1iE5Pg/WL65RdBxXJI/AAAAAAAADtA/0biZ4QhozqIyh1xDPGCOOvDgMu4Lv72FACLcB/s1600/why-president-trump-should-pick-a-fight-with-the-ncaa-1484927829.jpg" imageanchor="1" ><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-MjW5W1iE5Pg/WL65RdBxXJI/AAAAAAAADtA/0biZ4QhozqIyh1xDPGCOOvDgMu4Lv72FACLcB/s1600/why-president-trump-should-pick-a-fight-with-the-ncaa-1484927829.jpg" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Why President Trump should pick a fight with the NCAA</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | January 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">D</span>ear President Trump,<br /><br />Congratulations! You did it. Proved all the haters and losers wrong. You're the President of the United Freaking States of America. Welcome to Washington.<br /><br />Of course, you're not coming here to fit in. You're here to win, so often and bigly that we all get bored of it. And that means keeping your campaign promises. Matching your deeds to your words. Or Tweets. Whatever. People—many people—are saying you're not up to it. So here's a suggestion to make the <i>sports</i> part of America great again, and we know <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/highlight/some-sports-related-donald-trump-photos-for-you-to-enjoy">you love sports</a>. As a bonus, it involves two of your favorite things—picking public fights, and sticking it to doubters.<br /><br />Intrigued? Good. Here goes. It's time for you to take on the National Collegiate Athletic Association. And to take up for college athletes. <br /><br />Make it so they can get paid.<br /><br />Your campaign was many things. A movement. A ratings bonanza. A wooden stake driven directly into the heart of Billy Bush's career. But above all, it was a thumb in the eye to the status quo. Mr. President, let me tell you about another rigged system. It's called amateurism. It's a system built around the idea that college athletes should not be allowed to be paid for their labor, even though they are, in fact, working—and generating tremendous economic value through their self-sacrifice, industriousness, and hustle. Literal hustle, like diving for loose balls and being hospitalized for working out too hard.<br /><br />You're a sports fan. And a businessman. In fact, you've been in the sports business. So you already know that major college sports are a multibillion-dollar industry. And you know that athletes have value. Heck, you once made Doug Flutie the highest-paid player in professional football. You did that because you had to compete—had to outbid the NFL, as well as your fellow USFL owners, to sign a great, great college quarterback. The best. Everyone was talking about him. You wanted to win, and you paid the price.<br /><br />But that's not how it works in the NCAA. In college sports, schools agree <i>not</i> to compete. Because they're scared. They want to keep all the money to themselves. So they punish successful, hard-working athletes, telling them they can have tuition, room, board, and maybe a small stipend—and not a dollar beyond that. Everybody knows that Deshaun Watson was worth way more to Clemson University than the value of his athletic scholarship. In the real world—your world—he'd be able to cash in, take gifts from boosters, a salary from his school, endorsement dollars to slap his name on branded products, like hotels and steaks. In the real world, Deshaun Watson and many, many other athletes would be able to cash in.<i></i><br /><br />But no. That's not allowed. Because they're amateurs. Meanwhile, coaches and administrators get richer all the time, mostly because (a) they make the rules and (b) enforce them, too. Funny how that works. Like I said, it's a rigged system. Sad! Just the sort of thing you've promised to blow up.<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1480px" data-original-width="2220px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/01/20/why-president-trump-should-pick-a-fight-with-the-ncaa-body-image-1484927993.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Dear Mr. President: Just pretend he's Jeb Bush. Photo by Tommy Gilligan-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Mr. Trump, you've promised to unleash the power of American business—big and small—by eliminating stifling regulations. Well, guess what? NCAA amateurism produces nothing but stupid, pointless rules. So dumb. Dumb like you wouldn't believe. A few years ago, Louisiana State University baseball player Chris Sciambra suffered a potentially life-threatening neck injury during a road game, and was flown back to Baton Rouge, La. on an Auburn University private jet.<a href="http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/03/as_lsus_chris_sciambra_recover.html"> </a><a href="http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2012/03/as_lsus_chris_sciambra_recover.html">His father had to drive home separately</a>—because joining his ailing son on the plane might have violated NCAA rules. Which ones? No one really knew. But better safe than sorry.<br /><br />Over the years, the NCAA's 400-plus page rulebook has covered whether coaches can serve their players bagels; whether those bagels can be topped with cream cheese, jelly, and other condiments; and when Gatorade should be served instead of chocolate milk. It has prevented rowers from betting their racing shirts against each other, and coaches' wives from sending Christmas cards to new recruits. That's right—the NCAA has fought the War on Christmas!<br /><br />Mr. President, wouldn't you like to light that rulebook on fire? Wouldn't you like to take a picture of those flames and post it on Twitter?<br /><br />You've made jobs your top priority. You said that you'll be the job-creatingest president the country has ever known. Let's do some math. There are roughly 13,000 football and men's basketball players at the 129 major NCAA sports schools. That's roughly 13,000 campus jobs just waiting to be created.<br />And the best part is, you don't even have cut a deal to make them happen. You just have to speak up and be honest about what they already are! Only don't take my word for it. Ask the Chicago office of the National Labor Relations Board, which ruled that, duh, 40-60 hours of major college football is work, even though the NCAA tries to pretend otherwise with politically correct terms like "student-athlete."<br /><br />Oh, and you know what's great about college sports jobs? They can't be outsourced. No one's shipping them to Mexico. They'll stay right here, making America great again. Making America <i>rich</i> again. <br /><br />Speaking of rich: big-time college sports are a $10-12 billion-a-year industry. Football and men's basketball players receive about 10 percent of that. In a free market, like in pro sports, they'd likely receive closer to 50 percent. So by overturning NCAA amateurism, you'd be creating real wealth for thousands of young Americans. Big, big win. Plus, you know who would benefit most? African-Americans. A community you've specifically promised to help, a group your haters say you don't care about. Wouldn't it feel good to prove them wrong?<a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports"> </a><a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports">I've calculated that amateurism strips black athletes and their families of $2.2 billion a year</a>. Moreover,<a href="http://www.playboy.com/articles/makers-into-takers"> </a><a href="http://www.playboy.com/articles/makers-into-takers">it turns makers into takers,</a> forcing productive, talented young men to rely on government giveaways like Pell Grants and<a href="http://https//twitter.com/DCarr8/statuses/819029664081408000"> </a><a href="http://https//twitter.com/DCarr8/statuses/819029664081408000">food stamps</a>.<br /><br />Don't you want to be the president who gave college athletes, especially black college athletes, a leg up instead of a handout? <br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1072px" data-original-width="1876px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/01/20/why-president-trump-should-pick-a-fight-with-the-ncaa-body-image-1484928254.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Just look at all of those potential American jobs that can't be outsourced. Photo by Jasen Vinlove-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Look, taking on the NCAA won't be easy. The organization is a powerful incumbent, the ultimate insider, well-connected in Washington.<a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/are-athletic-directors-angling-for-a-washington-bailout-of-ncaa-amateurism"> </a><a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/are-athletic-directors-angling-for-a-washington-bailout-of-ncaa-amateurism">It is ready, willing, and able to lobby the government to get what it wants, and to preserve its sweetheart status.</a> Moreover, college sports amateurism is a cultural tradition, the way things have always been done. People, many people, will say this is a losing cause. That it can't be done, and that you shouldn't bother to try. <br /><br />Remember: those same losers said you couldn't be president! You didn't listen then. Don't listen now. You're Donald Trump. You're here to Drain the Swamp. Right now, Washington is divided. Our country is divided. You've said you want to bring Americans together. This is a chance to heal our partisan wounds. Amateurism is an affront to free market capitalism.<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/30/the-free-market-case-against-the-ncaa-chokehold-on/"> </a><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/30/the-free-market-case-against-the-ncaa-chokehold-on/">True conservatives will support you.</a><u> </u>The NCAA system also impoverishes workers to make a handful of managers rich. Real liberals will have your back. Obama couldn't get Democrats and Republicans to work together. Do this right, and you'll show every last loser that, yes, <i>you </i>can. <br /><br />Mr. President, your campaign—your entire life, really—has been about one thing. Making great deals. Why not give college athletes an opportunity to do the same? It's a no-brainer. Unless, of course, you don't really mean all the things you've said. If that's the case, I guess you'll fit right in with Washington, after all.<br /><b><br /></b> <b><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/why-president-trump-should-pick-a-fight-with-the-ncaa" target="_blank">Read the original article at VICE Sports</a></b>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-64834134348626068932017-01-19T08:31:00.000-05:002017-03-07T08:38:04.797-05:00Public Option<a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-e8JO6OeFtds/WL63h_3HnNI/AAAAAAAADs0/53cJRFiaYcwMBRHxBrbGwU6zSjIezSLEwCLcB/s1600/are-athletic-directors-angling-for-a-washington-bailout-of-ncaa-amateurism-1484841959.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-e8JO6OeFtds/WL63h_3HnNI/AAAAAAAADs0/53cJRFiaYcwMBRHxBrbGwU6zSjIezSLEwCLcB/s1600/are-athletic-directors-angling-for-a-washington-bailout-of-ncaa-amateurism-1484841959.jpg" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Are athletic directors angling for a Washington bailout of NCAA amateurism?</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | January 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">T</span>om McMillen swears this is not what it looks like. Not yet, at least. A former basketball star and member of Congress, McMillen now heads LEAD1, a<a href="http://https//twitter.com/lead1acom?lang=en"> </a><a href="http://https//twitter.com/lead1acom?lang=en">trade group for college athletic directors</a> at the nation's biggest sports schools.<br /><br />Yes, McMillen acknowledges, his group recently announced the<a href="http://www.prweb.com/releases/2016/12/prweb13944628.htm"> </a><a href="http://www.prweb.com/releases/2016/12/prweb13944628.htm">formation of a political action committee</a> (PAC), the better to funnel money from its members to campaigns and candidates.<br /><br />Yes, LEAD1 <i>also </i>will be<a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/college-athletic-directors-bring-gala-business-to-trump-international-hotel/2017/01/09/c30ae36c-d394-11e6-9cb0-54ab630851e8_story.html?utm_term=.9305f7e18ad4"> </a><a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/college-athletic-directors-bring-gala-business-to-trump-international-hotel/2017/01/09/c30ae36c-d394-11e6-9cb0-54ab630851e8_story.html?utm_term=.9305f7e18ad4">holding a fall gala at the Trump Hotel</a> in downtown Washington, D.C., where lawmakers will have a chance to mingle with campus power brokers, and the president-elect himself—a longtime acquaintance of McMillen's—may appear.<br /><br />And yes, the ongoing battle over the National Collegiate Athletic Association's multibillion-dollar amateur economy—a system that prevents athletes from being paid, yet<a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/42924176"> </a><a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/42924176">enriches athletic directors</a><u> </u>enough <i>that they can afford their own PAC</i>—may ultimately be settled on Capitol Hill, given that association president Mark Emmert and others have said they may<a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/colleges-may-seek-antitrust-exemption-for-ncaa-1406741252"> </a><a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/colleges-may-seek-antitrust-exemption-for-ncaa-1406741252">seek a Congressional antitrust exemption</a> if federal courts continue to rule that the status quo is, well, illegal.<br /><br />Connect the dots, and it sure as heck seems like LEAD1 fits into a larger push by the NCAA and its allies to kneecap college sports pay-for-play via a Washington bailout. Only McMillen insists that's not the case.<br /><br />"We have zero agenda right now," says McMillen, a former University of Maryland basketball player and three-term Congressman. "We've not spoken to one member of Congress about any issue in college sports. We've never talked about pay for play as a group. What we are trying to do is build relationships, so when the time comes, we can be helpful. <br /><br />"Down the road, [Donald] Trump may come in and try tax reform, changing the rules for tax deductibility on athletic scholarships. Or maybe there are Title IX issues. Who knows? If an issue comes up where the athletic directors or the school presidents need to come to Washington and walk the halls [of Congress], we'll be ready for it."<br /><br />College sports critics, myself included, were skeptical when LEAD1—which was founded in 1986 and represents the 129 athletic directors at NCAA Division I-A schools, essentially the big-money football and men's basketball programs—announced its intention to create a PAC.<i> The Washington Post</i> wrote that McMillen's group was<a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/college-athletic-directors-bring-gala-business-to-trump-international-hotel/2017/01/09/c30ae36c-d394-11e6-9cb0-54ab630851e8_story.html?utm_term=.9305f7e18ad4"> </a><a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/college-athletic-directors-bring-gala-business-to-trump-international-hotel/2017/01/09/c30ae36c-d394-11e6-9cb0-54ab630851e8_story.html?utm_term=.9305f7e18ad4">looking to squash proposals that would allow scholarship athletes to be paid,</a> and that read right. Because besides preserving amateurism, what issue would possibly prompt athletic directors and university presidents to come to the capitol?<br /><br />Federal law has not been kind to the NCAA lately. Two years ago, a regional office of the National Labor Relations Board ruled that Northwestern University football players<a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/70479484/national-labor-relations-board-rules-northwestern-football-players-are-employees-can-unionize"> </a><a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/70479484/national-labor-relations-board-rules-northwestern-football-players-are-employees-can-unionize">qualify as school employees.</a> In a highly-publicized lawsuit brought by former UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon and other campus athletes against the NCAA, district judges found that the<a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/89036154/historic-obannon-ncaa-lawsuit-decision-changes-everything-and-nothing"> </a><a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/89036154/historic-obannon-ncaa-lawsuit-decision-changes-everything-and-nothing">association's restrictions on athlete compensation for the use of their names, images, and likenesses violate the Sherman Act.</a> Public and media opinion is slowly turning against amateurism—<a href="http://content.time.com/time/subscriber/article/0,33009,2151167,00.html">when you've lost TIME magazine</a>, you haven't lost America, but you're certainly looking up at a deficit on the scoreboard. And<a href="http://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/10620388/anti-trust-claim-filed-jeffrey-kessler-challenges-ncaa-amateur-model"> </a><a href="http://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/10620388/anti-trust-claim-filed-jeffrey-kessler-challenges-ncaa-amateur-model">an ongoing lawsuit filed by current college athletes and led by the lawyer who brought free agency to the National Football League</a>, Jeffrey Kessler, threatens to blow up pay-for-play prohibitions entirely.<br /><br />Meanwhile, big-time college sports have become a $10-12 billion-a-year industry with fixed compensation for labor and a lucrative free market for everyone else—including<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/03/06/college-athletics-directors-salaries-increase/1964239/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/03/06/college-athletics-directors-salaries-increase/1964239/">athletic directors making an average of $515,000 a year.</a><b> </b>If those same ADs now qualify as a well-to-do special interest group with a feathered nest to protect—and make no mistake, they do—then why wouldn't they try to game the system by lobbying Washington lawmakers, the same way gunmakers, pharmaceutical companies, and a host of other industries long have?<br /><br />"It's inevitable," says Sonny Vaccaro, who pioneered the practice of shoe companies paying schools and coaches to have athletes wear their products, and has since become one of the NCAA's most persistent critics. "The schools want complete autonomy and to keep control of everything. People like myself and athletes who don't have the strength to stand up for themselves know what this means. It means they're making friends with the Hill and donating money for the same reasons Wall Street donates. So they can curry favor. Because Congress is the branch of government that can control collegiate amateur sports—say that these are the rules, or change them."<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="2004px" data-original-width="1336px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/01/19/are-athletic-directors-angling-for-a-washington-bailout-of-ncaa-amateurism-body-image-1484842096.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">LEAD1 President and CEO Tom McMillen. Photo by Mitch Stringer-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />McMillen takes exception to that analysis. On a recent afternoon in a steakhouse located across the street from the Capitol Dome, he told VICE Sports that LEAD1's political goals have yet to be determined. "We're just telling people who we are, that we're new in town, and if you have any questions, reach out," he says. "We have no position on amateurism right now."<br /><br />When LEAD1's athletic directors take a unified position on that or other college sports issues, McMillen says, their stance will come from university presidents. Not the other way around. As for giving actual cash to candidates, lawyers are still processing the necessary paperwork for the LEAD1 PAC, which will be funded by personal donations from its members. <br /><br />"It's not going to be a big PAC," McMillen says. "Very small. What kind of politicians will we support? If we have a profile, it will be bipartisan—people who played college sports, love college sports, people who take an interest in them and believe in them."<br /><br />And what about politicians who have been critical of the NCAA and amateurism—lawmakers like Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill), who once called college athletics an "abysmal cesspool" and "the last plantation in America?" Would LEAD1 spend money to defeat them?<br /><br />"We have a committee that will decide our PAC policy, and it's not set yet, but I would say that we wouldn't get into contested races," McMillen says. "We're not going to dig too deep."<br /><br />In the not-too-distant future, though, it's easy to imagine LEAD1 spearheading an inside-the-Beltway push against pay-for-play. No school presidents have publicly expressed interest in allowing campus athletes to be freely compensated; to the contrary, Notre Dame president John Jenkins<a href="http://https//www.nytimes.com/2015/09/11/sports/ncaafootball/notre-dame-president-stands-firm-amid-shifts-in-college-athletics.html?_r=0"> </a><a href="http://https//www.nytimes.com/2015/09/11/sports/ncaafootball/notre-dame-president-stands-firm-amid-shifts-in-college-athletics.html?_r=0">told the </a><a href="http://https//www.nytimes.com/2015/09/11/sports/ncaafootball/notre-dame-president-stands-firm-amid-shifts-in-college-athletics.html?_r=0"><i>New York Times</i></a><a href="http://https//www.nytimes.com/2015/09/11/sports/ncaafootball/notre-dame-president-stands-firm-amid-shifts-in-college-athletics.html?_r=0"> that his school will drop out of elite athletics if it's no longer permitted to price-fix</a>.<br /><br />Moreover, McMillen says he has been lunching with the NCAA's top Washington lobbyist to better coordinate their work—and given that the association has spent tens of millions of dollars fighting legal challenges to amateurism, it's unlikely that work will involve calculating signing bonuses for the University of Kentucky's latest group of incoming men's basketball recruits.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2016/12/22/14053986/athletic-directors-pac-lead1">As SB Nation's Alex Kirshner has pointed out,</a> LEAD1 could lobby against specific nominees for the NLRB, whose members could squash future efforts to unionize athletes at private schools. It could throw its support behind judicial nominees who seem more likely to agree with the NCAA's arguments in future antitrust lawsuits. <br /><br />McMillen's group also could play an important role in pushing for an antitrust exemption. In her <i>O'Bannon</i> ruling, Judge Claudia Wilken wrote that the fight over amateurism would be better resolved by Congress than by the courts. The NCAA appears to be gearing up for that possibility:<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/01/20/ncaa-lobbying-expenditures-congress-capitol-hill-washington/22078773/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/01/20/ncaa-lobbying-expenditures-congress-capitol-hill-washington/22078773/">according to </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/01/20/ncaa-lobbying-expenditures-congress-capitol-hill-washington/22078773/"><i>USA Today,</i></a> the association spent $580,000 lobbying Congress in 2014, more than what it spent over the three previous years combined. <br /><br />That same year, the NCAA also hired outside lobbyists for the first time,<a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/ncaa-hire-lobbyist-national-collegiate-athletic-association-107830"> </a><a href="http://www.politico.com/story/2014/06/ncaa-hire-lobbyist-national-collegiate-athletic-association-107830">reportedly contracting a high-powered K Street firm</a> to work on issues related to what its disclosure forms called the "welfare of student-athletes." As Politico noted at the time, that was a key phrase, underscoring the contention that players are first and foremost budding young scholars—who are given scholarships and housing because they also happen to be very good at sports—and not professional athletes who should receive compensation.<br /><br />"As current and former players have stood up and challenged the NCAA's unjust rules, the people who are profiteering from it are deciding to take action," says Ramogi Huma, a former UCLA linebacker and longtime athlete's rights activist who was instrumental in the Northwestern unionization effort. "There's no high ground here. It's all about money."<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1589px" data-original-width="2384px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/01/19/are-athletic-directors-angling-for-a-washington-bailout-of-ncaa-amateurism-body-image-1484842523.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">When you're happy to be here, and also could set the rules for college sports pay-for-play. Photo by Jack Gruber-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />For the NCAA, the halls of Congress are akin to a home court. Many of the association's member schools already have full-time federal lobbyists; better still, they have institutional clout. What member of Alabama's Congressional delegation would want to take a public stand against the University of Alabama, especially against the wishes of that school's beloved athletic program? Some lawmakers are alumni of the very schools that will be lobbying them—and if they're sports fans, they're likely to be watching the big game from a luxury box. For them, the system is working just fine.<br /><br />When schools squawk, lawmakers listen. Case in point? In 1986,<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-10-25/got-college-football-tickets-take-a-tax-break"> the Internal Revenue Service ruled that donations to school athletic departments to purchase tickets were no longer tax-deductible.</a> Sen. Russell Long from Louisiana and Rep. J.J. Pickle from Texas promptly slipped an amendment into the larger Tax Reform Act of that year to exclude Louisiana State University and the University of Texas from the IRS's decision. When other colleges and universities realized they had been left out, they were furious. As McMillen tells the story, athletic directors personally lobbied Congress, which responded by creating 80 percent deduction for tickets—one that applied to all schools, and remains in effect today. "That's the last time the athletic directors came to Washington," he says. "So this is not new. All we're doing is a remobilization drill so that is something comes up, we'll be ready."<br /><br />If that something is an antitrust exemption, LEAD1's athletic directors couldn't have hired a better salesman than McMillen. A former Rhodes Scholar, he's something of a true believer in the NCAA's student-athlete mythos. While McMillen is quick to point out that he's not personally opposed to players receiving more benefits from their schools—better health insurance; the ability to market their images and likenesses; maybe even bonus money contingent upon academic performance and graduation—he believes that making them employees will spoil their educations. "I think it will diminish the scholar-athlete bond that is essential to college sports," he says. "The most important thing we can do is give kids a meaningful degree and the chance to become a leader."<br /><br />On Capitol Hill, McMillen already has a reputation as a college sports reformer. In the early 1990s, he sponsored and helped pass the Student Right to Know Act, which made it mandatory for schools to disclose their graduation rates for athletes. He also championed a bill that would have granted the NCAA a limited antitrust exemption for football and basketball—sound familiar?—in exchange for improving athlete graduation rates and distributing television money more equitably among its member institutions.<br /><br />"It was pretty radical at the time," he says. "It would have spread TV money around based on how well you did with education. It would have given players $300 a month stipends, tax-free. Back then, I said it was a time capsule bill. No one would pay attention to it for 25 years."<br /><br />McMillen laughs.<br /><br />"That model has zero chance today. But the concept of conditional antitrust is very real. It's also very difficult to achieve."<br /><br />That much is true. Two years ago, Obama administration officials met with athletic directors and NCAA executives to discuss the creation of a presidential commission on college sports—a body that reportedly would have considered a McMillen-like grand bargain, with Washington offering college sports an antitrust exemption, and schools promising to do a better job of educating athletes while spending less money on coach and administrator salaries. Despite bipartisan support, however, the commission didn't materialize. "The [White House] never fought the fight," says someone with knowledge of the situation. "They had no backbone with the NCAA. Politicians are strange animals. They go with the flow."<br /><br />While both the House and Senate have held hearings in recent years to talk about college sports—Republicans criticizing athlete unionization attempts; Democrats expressing concern over graduation rates and campus sexual assaults—Congress hasn't followed up with any concrete action, and a handful of reform bills have gone nowhere. Lawmakers have bigger fish to fry, and more importantly, they're loathe to take on high-profile issues that offer little in the way of partisan or electoral gain. Imagine you're an ambitious member. Is preventing Malik Monk from getting paid—or allowing him to cash in—really going to advance your political career?<br /><br />"We've tried to get lawmakers to introduce bills in our favor, too," Huma says. "It's not something they want to touch, even if every Congressperson says they're a sports fan. Overall, if you look at this whole issue, Congress isn't looking to regulate college sports."<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1270px" data-original-width="1800px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/01/19/are-athletic-directors-angling-for-a-washington-bailout-of-ncaa-amateurism-body-image-1484842733.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">When you won't let sad! ethics lawyers get in the way of a great deal. Photo by John Blackie-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />For McMillen's constituents, a related calculation may apply. Much like the nation as whole, Washington is bitterly polarized. Political and cultural animosity reigns, and likely will become more pitched under Trump. Protecting one's interests on Capitol Hill makes sense if you're Exxon Mobil. Is it worth the trouble if you're Alabama's athletic director? Do you really want your sports programs associated with partisan rancor? And are you ready to deal with possible blowback? It's one thing to disappoint sports fans by hiring a lousy football coach; it's quite another to court national controversy by being connected to the wrong politician on the wrong issue at the wrong moment.<br /><br />Take LEAD1's decision to hold their shake-and-schmooze Congressional gala at the Trump Hotel. The <i>Post</i> didn't just note the event on a calendar—it made it the lead item in a story about the Trump administration's conflicts of interest, writing that the party would "combine the tried-and-true Washington practice of seeking to influence elected officials with the fresh twist of paying a company owned by the president of the United States. Bookings at Trump's hotel create potential ethical conundrums going forward as groups seeking political influence in Washington decide where to take their conference business."<br /><br />Just like that, athletic directors inadvertently stepped into a ongoing political controversy. Richard Painter, a former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, told that<i> Post </i>that he found LEAD1's plans "concerning" and "very risky." <br /><br />McMillen says that LEAD1 booked the Presidential Ballroom at the Trump Hotel for a simple reason—the organization needed a room that could host 700 people, and everything else was already booked. "We were late on this, we had very few choices, and the Trump Hotel was the best facility with the capacity we wanted," he says with a sigh. "The <i>Post</i> made this story about somehow we are currying favor with Trump. Listen, we're staying at the Mandarin [a nearby D.C. Hotel]. If I were currying favor, I would have moved our rooms, too!"<br /><br />Such is the risk that LEAD1 is taking: become political, and people will judge you accordingly. Near the end of our meeting, I ask McMillen a simple question. Suppose I'm an African-American college athlete. And suppose I'm familiar with Trump's racially toxic campaign rhetoric; his <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/08/donald-trumps-doubling-down-on-the-central-park-five-reflects-a-bigger-problem/?utm_term=.98693640e6a5" target="_blank">incendiary statements about the Central Park Five</a>; his obnoxious, conspiratorial questioning of President Obama's birthplace; <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/28/us/politics/donald-trump-housing-race.html?_r=0" target="_blank">his history of alleged housing discrimination</a>. Come this fall, I see you and a group of wealthy, mostly white athletic directors having a party at Trump's luxury hotel, hobnobbing with a bunch of Washington movers and shakers. How do you explain and justify that to me?<br /><br />"Am I putting a litmus test on hotels?" McMillen says. "Marriott. What is the Mormon position on gays? Four Seasons. What is the Saudi support for Sharia Law? I don't want to get crazy about this. It's a damn hotel."<br /><br />Another sigh.<br /><br />"But I am sympathetic to that," he says. "Listen, our mission is about the student-athletes. I don't want to get into the bigger politics." Perhaps not. Only now that the NCAA and its allies have come to Washington, they may not a have a choice. <br /><br /><b><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/are-athletic-directors-angling-for-a-washington-bailout-of-ncaa-amateurism" target="_blank">Read the original article at VICE Sports</a></b>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-60136800026606491942017-01-11T08:25:00.000-05:002017-03-07T08:28:36.119-05:00All About Pac Pro Football<a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-VrCrJ7msw4o/WL60s6-McOI/AAAAAAAADso/jmiyiW53X4MEyWRjc7eWE4Em79FCqPRegCLcB/s1600/tom-bradys-agent-is-starting-a-football-league-for-college-age-players-1484080140.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-VrCrJ7msw4o/WL60s6-McOI/AAAAAAAADso/jmiyiW53X4MEyWRjc7eWE4Em79FCqPRegCLcB/s1600/tom-bradys-agent-is-starting-a-football-league-for-college-age-players-1484080140.jpg" /></a><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Tom Brady's agent is starting a new pro football league for college-age players</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | January 2017</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">F</span>ollowing high school, baseball players can enter the Major League Baseball draft. Basketball players can play overseas, or jump to the National Basketball Association following a year on campus. Tennis players, golfers, and gymnasts all have professional options, too.<br /><br />Meanwhile, post-prep football players essentially have one path to the National Football League: participate in at least three years of college football, risking serious injury and submitting to economic exploitation.<br /><br />Only what if those same athletes had a legitimate choice? What if there was a developmental league for America's most popular sport? That's the idea behind Pacific Pro Football, a new college-aged league that was announced on Wednesday and plans to kick off next year.<br /><br />Pac Pro is the brainchild of former NFL receiver Ed McCaffrey and sports agent Don Yee, who represents New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady and has spent almost 30 years working in professional football. VICE Sports spoke with Yee about what distinguishes Pac Pro from college football, what lessons can be drawn from previous professional football leagues, and how the new league may influence the ongoing battle over college athlete compensation.<br /><br /><b>VICE Sports: Let's start with the basics. What does this league entail, how is it going to work?</b><br /><br />Don Yee: It's a four-team professional league that will start play in July 2018, initially based in four different counties in Southern California. We'll have 50 players per team, and an average salary and benefits projected at $50,000 per player.<br /><br />The player population will be players either directly from high school, or up to fewer than four years removed from high school. This is a group that has never been professionalized before. Our venture is first of its kind.<br /><br />Our brand of football will be professional in nature. The calendar will have a regular season, playoff, and off-season conditioning and coaching periods.<br /><br />We're hoping to do a good job developing players for pro football as well as helping them find a path for life outside of football.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>What do you mean by a professional brand of football?</b><br /><br />Professional football is different than football at the amateur level. The rules. The size of the ball. The hash marks on the field. The timing of the game. Everything in our league will be like the NFL. The amateur level is more of a coach- and scheme-driven game, while the pro level is more of a mismatch game. We'll play a pro style of ball. But we also anticipate some rules modifications to enhance player safety.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Like what?</b><br /><br />Some of the ones we're considering might be to eliminate kickoff and punt returns during games. Another might be to implement more of a man-to-man defense type of game. Another might be to look at potentially limiting blitzing—that would enhance safety for quarterbacks, as well as allow offensive linemen to develop in a matchup-type scheme. And another might be to look at prohibiting or limiting types of offense plays that use multiple receiver crossing routes.<br /><br />I've talked to a lot a pro football scouts about some of these ideas. What type of football would they like to see? The idea is to have the athleticism of the players on full display. Philosophically, it will be a player-centric league. That means the safety and welfare of the players will be paramount.<br /><br />Football is so physical and violent. I would like the players to have an experience where they feel the administrators are taking their well-being into consideration at every step of the way.<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1513px" data-original-width="2017px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/01/10/tom-bradys-agent-is-starting-a-pro-football-league-for-college-age-players-body-image-1484080278.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Physical, violent, and price-fixed. Photo by Winslow Townson-USA TODAY Sports</div><b><br /></b> <b>Let's take a step back. Where did the idea for this league come from?</b><br /><br />I've been thinking about this for many years. To some degree, I've written publicly about it. I got tired of thinking about it, and challenged myself to do something. It comes out of a lot of discussion and information I've accumulated in nearly 30 years of working in professional football. Doing a lot of careful listening in conversations with scouts, players, coaches, officials, media. It's really a culmination of a lot of that.<br /><br />It has become very clear to me, particularly over the last 15 years or so, that emerging athletes from middle school on have become much more specialized and even professionalized in their training and protocols—in becoming good at whatever sport they choose to become good at. In every other sport you can think of, even global sports, young and emerging talent is about to be professional directly from high school or even younger. The only outlier is football. I felt it should no longer be an outlier.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Who are some of the key people involved?</b><br /><br />Our current COO, Bradley Edwards, is a former ESPN and NFL executive. Our chief content officer is Jeff Husvar, a former executive at Fox Sports Digital. Our advisory board includes [former NFL coach] Mike Shanahan, [former NFL official and current FOX analyst] Mike Pereira, [ESPN reporter] Adam Schefter, [sports business consultant and former NFL Super Bowl czar] Jim Steeg, and Steve Schmidt.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Wait—Steve Schmidt, the MSNBC political analyst?</b><br /><br />He's a big football fan! [Laughs] A big thinker. And he has an impressive network in all areas of society. This is a project he's enthusiastic about.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Previous attempts to launch independent football leagues have had mixed success at best. What have you learned from looking at the past in terms of what to do, and also what to avoid?</b><br /><br />We have done a lot of research into those other attempts. Not just football but other sports. One of the things we realized is that while other football leagues haven't succeeded in the long term, many succeeded in the short term in various ways.<br /><br />The XFL succeeded by creating initial interest. The TV ratings for early broadcasts were very high. But long term, they went astray a bit in their presentation of game. In the mid 1980s, the USFL proved it could procure talented players and coaches, put on a good product, and sell out venues.<br /><br />Many of those coaches and players went on to Hall of Fame careers. The only reason it didn't succeed was that at the time, there was no way to generate significant media rights—the amount of content distributors in the country was limited.<br /><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" scrolling="no" src="https://video.vice.com/en_us/embed/587fd217fc90dc2865e2c65e" width="560"></iframe><br /><b><br /></b> <b>Who's paying for this? What are your startup costs?</b><br /><br />Over the past years, we've conducted an angel round of financing that we are in the process of closing. Due to [Securities and Exchange Commission] regulations, I'm prohibited from speaking in specifics about our efforts in that area, but obviously, it will take a lot of capital.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Let's pretend I'm a skeptical investor. Why should I give you my money?</b><br /><br />Again, I have to be careful in how I answer. What I can say, generally, is that football is undeniably America's No. 1 passion sport, as evidenced by television ratings. We're creating a football league and creating more content inventory, and we live in a day and age with more potential content distributors than ever. And this is also a product that for the average consumer is not going to be difficult to understand.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>So what makes Pac Pro different from previous leagues?</b><br />All of them used the player population that had already exhausted its college eligibility. We're going to use a player population that is eligible for college participation.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Which means you'll be competing for talent with NCAA football.</b><br /><br />We're simply going to offer a choice.<br /><br />There's no question that there is tremendous interest—as evidenced by successful web businesses—in emerging football talent. ESPN devotes an entire day to National Letter of Intent signings. People follow high school football talent and where it goes, and follow that talent earlier and earlier. We feel that giving the talent an opportunity and choice to professionalize earlier may bring along that fan interest.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Do you worry that those same football fans are interested in high school talent mostly because it currently ends up in college football, and may not be interested if it goes to your league?</b><br /><br />No. I generally try not to operate out of worry or fear. After doing a lot of research, as well as looking at entertainment industry here in Southern California, I feel there's enough data that shows fans tend to follow stars. So if we're able to bring aboard really good talent, the fan interest will eventually develop.<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1345px" data-original-width="2116px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/01/10/tom-bradys-agent-is-starting-a-pro-football-league-for-college-age-players-body-image-1484080554.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Does National Signing Day hoopla reflect America's love of college football, or top college-aged football talent? Photo by Jason Getz-USA TODAY Sports</div><b><br /></b> <b>Let's say I'm the top-ranked high school quarterback in the country. I'm giving you a meeting. How do you convince me that I should say no to Nick Saban at Alabama, and yes to your league?</b><br /><br />Well, I would never speak about your other options, I don't know the nature of them. But for us, first I would explain your salary and benefits compensation package. How that can be used to create a retirement plan for you at a very young age. What that could look like when you are in your 60s and withdrawing money.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>So the miracle of compound interest, huh?</b><br /><br />[Laughs] Of course! The second thing I would discuss is our calendar. While you are specializing in football, much of the year is still open for you to pursue off-field interests and create a foundation for your life after football.<br /><br />Third, if you aspire to a professional league beyond ours, you will be immediately immersed in that kind of play. Protocols, playbooks, techniques. Especially as a quarterback, you will develop faster. Your learning curve will be much shorter if you go on to the NFL.<br /><br />Fourth, because football is such a physical and violent sport, your body actually has an expiration date on it. And we play a much shorter schedule [than college football]. So your exposure to injury risk is substantially reduced.<br /><br />Lastly, I'd point out that we are considering a concept of no sitting on the bench in Pac Pro. Every player will be developed and will play. You will be assured of seeing practice and game repetitions.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>You mentioned injury risk. What are you doing, specifically, to protect players from brain trauma?</b><br /><br />We've already had a number of those discussions internally and externally with professionals in the brain injury field. We're still figuring out the best path, but I personally feel that path will be fluid.<br /><br />The very first thing we can do to enhance player safety—especially with concussions, which you can't fully eliminate—is to have our players play fewer games. Our players will play an eight-game season. In other leagues, that schedule is substantially longer. Speaking to a brain surgeon friend of mine about this, I said, "How about if we just reduced the games by nearly 50 percent?" He said, "That is the very best start you can think of to reduce the exposure to risk."<br /><br />On top of that, we would like every single player to play, so that means you won't have a single running back carrying 30-plus times a game—you'll have two running backs carrying 15 to 16 times. So you diversify the risk within the games, too.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>What about long-term injury coverage?</b><br /><br />Players will be employees of the league, so if you're hurt on the job, you will qualify for worker's compensation. We will have worker's comp insurance, and you'll be able to avail yourself of the system here in California, which is probably one of the more generous systems in the country.<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1511px" data-original-width="1149px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/01/10/tom-bradys-agent-is-starting-a-pro-football-league-for-college-age-players-body-image-1484080805.jpg?output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Fun fact: the NCAA invented the quasi-legal term "student-athlete" in the 1950s to avoid paying worker's compensation claims to the families of dead and injured college football players. Photo by Mark J. Rebilas-USA TODAY Sports</div><b><br /></b> <b>You said that you also want the league to help players find a life path outside of football. How?</b><br /><br />So for me, especially after working with NFL players for so many years, all football players understand the opportunity to play the game at a high level—even if you play ten to 12 years—is a short time in your life. You will be a former player much longer than a current player. I've always felt it was very important to try to help people in some way develop a path for that.<br /><br />In Pac Pro, we take an expensive view of education. That may be a traditional academic party, or a vocational path, or a range of internships to help someone find their passion outside of football. We will have academic and vocational counselors assigned to each team, listening to each player and helping them form a plan to make some progress in that passion. Starting in Southern California, where we have a diversified economy, we think we can offer players a range of internship and networking opportunities with professionals from a range of industries.<br /><br />You can't predetermine everyone's future path after football, but we hope to ignite that passion.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Where and when will games take place?</b><br /><br />We have a plethora of football facilities here. Community colleges, high schools, universities that used to have [NCAA Division I] football. We're already in discussions, and we project using two facilities on game days, Sundays during July and August.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>July and August—will it be too hot?</b><br /><br />We considered that, but here in Southern California we have a very temperate climate. We're lucky to have a coastline. [Laughs] And frankly many players already participate in seven-on-seven leagues during the summer.<br /><br />We'd like to play in the summer. One reason being, we have a larger range of facilities available. Another is that from a content standpoint, those are months we feel might be underserved for football. Also, we want to conclude prior to Labor Day so that the traditional academic calendar will be available to our players if they want to pursue school.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Speaking of those schools, you've written and spoken publicly about the NCAA system economically exploiting its revenue-sport athletes, particularly in the multibillion-dollar industry of major college football. Does that play into what you're trying to accomplish with this league?</b><br /><br />No, it doesn't. That's a personal opinion of mine about that particular system. And in building this product, it really just focused on this product and not really as a comparison to any other product.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>You're a lawyer. I know you've followed the O'Bannon case, as well as current antitrust cases challenging NCAA amateurism and limits on athlete compensation. Do you have any concern that the NCAA will point to your league, even if it is a relatively small startup, and say, "See, college-age football players have choice, we're not an effective monopoly, we should be allowed to continue to collude"?</b><br /><br />That's a terrific question! I can't speak to the NCAA's legal strategy, but if you're being accused of antitrust violations and there exists in the marketplace some other option, it's very possible to some degree that it mitigates those allegations. [<i>Laughs</i>] But I am not an antitrust law expert.<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="965px" data-original-width="1448px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2017/01/10/tom-bradys-agent-is-starting-a-pro-football-league-for-college-age-players-body-image-1484080926.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">When you welcome the outside competition, because it may make it legally easier for your cartel members to remain anti-competitive. Photo by Kyle Terada-USA TODAY Sports</div><b><br /></b> <b>What would you say to people who may think, <i data-redactor-tag="i">We already have college football, why do we need a league like this?</i></b><br /><br />Due to exceptional marketing, most people naturally feel that there is only one path to professional football in this country. But after discussing the issues thoroughly, people generally come around to a conclusion of <i>why is that?</i> Why isn't there an alternative or a different option for the players?<br /><br />The current system in place and the people who administer it and sell it have done an exceptional job over many, many decades. But as we can see all around us in society, there are many things that have been entrenched for a long time that have changed. We feel there's room in the football industry to innovate. I'm not so sure I look at this as changing proposition. It's a supplemental proposition. We are expanding the football industry, and creating jobs for players, coaches, officials, executives. And providing players a choice.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>How do you convince fans—who seem pretty happy with college football—to give this league a chance? </b><br /><br />Hopefully, we have people a lot better than I am at marketing. [<i>Laughs</i>] But the best way, I believe, is to bring fans closer to the action. Make it more intimate and accessible, as well as provide a high quality of play. That means probably starting out in smaller venues, and making it an affordable experience for an entire family.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>What would success look like for your league five years from now? A decade from now?</b><br /><br />I think success for us will be measured by player satisfaction. If every player feels it was a good and fair experience, the league will be successful, whether we stay at four teams or eventually expand to eight, 12, or 16 teams. We feel this is model of the future. Football can still be played at a high level with engaged fans, but more safely and with the welfare of the participants always at the forefront.<br /><b><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/don-yee-tom-bradys-agent-is-starting-a-pro-football-league-for-college-age-players" target="_blank"><br /></a></b> <b><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/don-yee-tom-bradys-agent-is-starting-a-pro-football-league-for-college-age-players" target="_blank">Read the original story at VICE Sports</a></b>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-11050164205764923532016-11-30T16:09:00.000-05:002017-07-27T14:37:05.641-04:00Friday Night Lights Out<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-c1tXyfoyyXQ/WD8_2ptX1TI/AAAAAAAADqc/ChGQDhGIj28ldIxb_g6X8HUn6fICpwg3QCLcB/s1600/fnlo-high-res.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-c1tXyfoyyXQ/WD8_2ptX1TI/AAAAAAAADqc/ChGQDhGIj28ldIxb_g6X8HUn6fICpwg3QCLcB/s1600/fnlo-high-res.jpg" /></a></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>The case for abolishing high school football</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | December 2016</attribution></div><br /><span class="drop-cap">"W</span>hat is right is not always popular. And what is popular is not always right." Russell Davis stands behind a podium, hands in his pockets, invoking Albert Einstein. He looks very much like a man committing small-scale political suicide—which, in all likelihood, he is.<br /><br />It's a May evening in Las Vegas, Nevada. Davis, a 44-year-old public works employee, is holding a town hall meeting, discussing his candidacy for the Clark County School Board. He'd like to expand the school lunch program, offer more college prep courses, and explore building dorms for students who need housing. It all sounds innocuous, even boring, and none of it explains why Davis has appeared on local television and <a href="http://usatodayhss.com/2016/nevada-school-board-candidate-runs-on-platform-of-banning-football#pq=NMbxpv" target="_blank"><i>USA Today's</i> website</a>, nor why a camera crew is setting up at the back of the room.<br /><br />Oh, and it definitely doesn't explain why Davis has been called a "dork," a "pussy," a "gay," and a "nanny state liberal" who's "almost as krazy as Hillary."<br /><br />No, the reason Davis has attracted attention and ire is simple: he wants to eliminate public high school football. Friday Night Lights out. No more homecoming games, sweaty August two-a-days, and afternoon-in-the-auditorium pep rallies. <i>Adios</i> to a beloved American tradition<a href="http://www.nfhs.org/articles/high-school-sports-participation-increases-for-27th-consecutive-year/"> </a><a href="http://www.nfhs.org/articles/high-school-sports-participation-increases-for-27th-consecutive-year/">played by roughly 1.1 million high school students nationwide</a> (double the participation number of the next most popular prep sport, track and field), and by approximately 3,600 students in Clark County, the country's fifth-largest school district.<br /><br />"When I decided to run, people said, 'Don't bring this up,'" Davis says. "They said, 'Get elected first. And then bring it up.'"<br /><br />Davis loves football. He grew up going to prep games, and hopes that his favorite NFL franchise, the Oakland Raiders, ends up moving to Las Vegas. When Davis played sandlot football as a child, he liked to pretend he was Jack Tatum, the notoriously hard-hitting former Raiders defensive back nicknamed The Assassin, whose infamous helmet-to-helmet collision with opposing receiver Darryl Stingley left the latter man paralyzed for life.<br /><br />Still, Davis wants to make the coming high school season the area's last. "Taxpayer dollars I do not believe should be spent on this," he says. "The human brain is not designed to play the collision sport of football. We do not have an airbag between the brain and the skull."<br /><br />Football has a problem. The sport involves getting hit in the head, over and over, which can cause brain damage. People have been concerned about the game's inherent violence for as long as it has been played, especially when it comes to schoolchildren. In the early 1900s, both the godfather of modern football, Amos Alonzo Stagg, and the president of the University of Notre Dame called for abolishing the sport at the prep level. In 1909, the New York Board of Education banned it from the city's high schools.<br /><br />Football's proponents countered that equipment and rule changes could make the game acceptably safe, and besides, no other sport so effectively turned effete boys into robust men. They won the argument—New York City's prohibition lasted a single season—and have been winning it ever since.<br />Over the past decade, however, medical science has discovered that football is more dangerous than previously believed, linking the game to neurological deficits and disease in NFL veterans as well as players whose careers ended in high school. Those findings have rekindled the old debate, with Russell Davis and a handful of others arguing football has no place in public education, where the goal is to nurture, not harm, young minds.<br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/aMt4GDGEhgirrTmW4NCT4WkGZAT4D1Q4jNq0LfBD6tA-_oizcVcW05PNNgG8Eb-3SoTmYAQshfMldqVcPOALI9jg0p7a1jVSzMeLgVBSIE0dltXbiXzEFEgRoZ_LK36o0fS_ONYD" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Russell Davis at his town hall meeting, discussing why he wants to abolish high school football. Photo by Patrick Hruby</td></tr></tbody></table>Davis has two teenage children, a daughter and a son. They deserve better, he says. All children deserve better. They shouldn't be used as guinea pigs while scientists determine exactly how risky football really is; instead, students should be protected until researchers can prove the sport is acceptably safe. In the meantime, schools should spend their money elsewhere.<br /><br />"If I were to place my child in a car twice a day, every year, and have them drive into a brick wall at 25 miles per hour, I would most likely be arrested for child abuse," he says.<br /><br />From the popular television drama <i>Friday Night Lights</i> to recently announced plans to construct<a href="http://www.dallasnews.com/news/mckinney/2016/08/19/mckinney-isd-stadium-price-hike-shocks-officials-trustees"> </a><a href="http://www.dallasnews.com/news/mckinney/2016/08/19/mckinney-isd-stadium-price-hike-shocks-officials-trustees">a 12,000-seat, $69.9 million high school football stadium</a> in a Dallas suburb, high school football is undeniably popular—a cultural default as much a part of the American prep landscape as textbooks and prom. But is it right? Finishing his remarks at the town hall, Davis scans the room. There are 96 folding chairs, arranged in neat rows. With the exception of his campaign staff, his girlfriend, and a married couple sitting by the door, all of them are empty.<br /><br />"Any questions?" he says. "Don't be shy."<br /><br />Silence. Davis is believed to be the first school board candidate in the U.S. to run on a platform of banning football. Primary voting is 18 days away. Depending on how his five opponents fare, Davis figures he needs as many as 5,000 votes to get on the general election ballot in the fall.<br /><br />So far, he tells me, he can count on three.<br /><br />"Any questions?" Davis says.<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="1000px" data-original-width="1500px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/11/25/friday-night-lights-out-tk-body-image-1480112121.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Russell Davis announces his Clark County school board candidacy; high school football helmets. Photo illustration by Caitlin Kelly; photos courtesy Russell Davis (Davis) and by Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports (helmets)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><b>A few hours before his town hall meeting, </b>Davis scribbles on a whiteboard, outlining a path to 5,000 votes. He's up against an incumbent, Linda Young, who has been on the Clark County School Board since 2008. Another candidate, Adam Johnson, has a coveted teachers' union endorsement, and has raised (and spent) over $30,000 on his campaign.<br /><br />Davis doesn't have that kind of money. He does have a donation button on his campaign website,<a href="http://concussiongate.org/"> </a><a href="http://concussiongate.org/">concussiongate.org</a>. "Someone gave us $100," he says. "I was like, <i>Wow, this is great!</i>" Davis sighs. "But I'll probably give it back to them."<br /><br />Davis didn't have to run for office. Between running a small business that gives bicycle bar crawl tours of downtown Vegas and his day job with Clark County, he's plenty busy. He could have just written a letter to a local newspaper, or spoken up as a concerned citizen at a school board meeting. "Here's what would happen," Davis says. "They would sit and listen, and thank me. And then they'd move on. If you want to effect change, you have to change public policy."<br /><br />Davis graduated from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas with a political science degree, and then interned for Senator Richard Bryan (D-NV) on Capitol Hill. In 1998, he ran for a Nevada state senate seat and lost. "I was a 26-year-old pup," Davis says. "I thought I could change the world." His current campaign is different. Davis hasn't put up any lawn or street signs. He won't be conducting a single poll—though in between snacks at a downtown food festival, he did ask attendees what they thought about banning high school football.<br /><br />"People told us, 'You're fools, you're crazy,'" says Phil Pascal, a friend of Davis who is helping out with the campaign. "So we'd ask, 'OK, would you let your kid play?' And they'd say, 'Oh, <i>hell</i> no.'"<br /><br />"So it's OK for other people's kids to get injured, but not mine?" Davis says. "I think that's complacent."<br /><br />Davis grew up playing soccer. When he was young, colliding head-to-head with another player or catching a stray elbow to the skull was no big deal. "We'd get our bells rung, bounce right back up, and keep going," he says. But by the time Davis was coaching his own children—Isabella, 15, and Benjamin, 13—things had changed.<br /><br />For decades, football was considered acceptably safe for children. Yes, the sport could break bones, shred ligaments, and knock players out cold, but hard-shell plastic helmets had made catastrophic skull fractures and brain bleeds rare. Debilitating spinal injuries and deaths were freak occurrences. A few high-profile NFL veterans like quarterback Steve Young had retired due to concussions, but for the most part former players seemed OK. Groups such as the American Medical Association called for age restrictions and outright bans on boxing. No such calls were made for football.<br /><br />Everything shifted in 2002, when a Pittsburgh-based neuropathologist named Bennet Omalu examined the brain of deceased Pittsburgh Steelers center Mike Webster and diagnosed him with chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a neurodegenerative disease previously found in boxers, colloquially known as "punch-drunk syndrome," and linked to repeated blows to the head. Football helmets, it turns out, do not prevent concussions. Nor do they protect the brain—a spongy, gelatinous blob that floats inside the skull—from being rattled by sub-concussive blows, the little hits that happen on every down, the ones<a href="http://www.momsteam.com/sub-concussive/sub-concussive-hits-growing-concern-in-youth-sports?page=0%2C0"> </a><a href="http://www.momsteam.com/sub-concussive/sub-concussive-hits-growing-concern-in-youth-sports?page=0%2C0">scientists increasingly believe add up over time</a><a href="http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2016/04/01/Repeated-hits-to-head-bigger-football-threat-than-concussions/1101459532135/"> to produce lasting harm</a>.<br /><br />In 2009, Purdue University researchers studying an Indiana prep football team found that over the course of a ten-week season, players absorbed as many as 1,855 head hits of magnitudes up to 289 Gs—that is, 289 times the force of gravity, or nearly three times as forcefully as a dummy hits the windshield in a 25-mile-per-hour car crash. They also discovered that while athletes diagnosed with concussions performed poorly on cognitive tests and showed signs of dysfunction on functional magnetic-resonance imaging (fMRI) scans of their brains—which was expected—a number of athletes who had <i>not</i> been diagnosed showed similar signs of impairment. "They looked just as bad or worse as the concussed kids," says Tom Talavage, a biomedical engineering professor at Purdue. "At that point, [one of my colleagues] asked if we were ready for the fact that we might have to kill football." Subsequent studies by Talavage's group and others have <a href="http://neurosciencenews.com/concussion-neurology-school-football-5614/">produced similar findings.</a><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/W2JFWAdGsNL8fp_C-6Dvamn5K67laU7mMmI8aoICZwm3Uf7808X3BOsTVz6D_vUQv8V4tztgLU7WfLpR8qvXU4TyRYPMo9SEv1K7ndRQdJLFlXlQG9rfhM9d19JgjJGljpdgUrJ6" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Purdue University researcher Tom Talavage. Via YouTube</td></tr></tbody></table>While the science could often be complicated, Davis thought, the bottom line was not. Getting hit in head was bad, and pretending otherwise was worse. He began eliminating heading in Isabella and Benjamin's soccer practices and games, teaching players to instead trap balls with their chests. Last fall, the United States Soccer Federation released guidelines that barred children ages ten and under from heading and placed limits on the technique for players younger than 13. Davis checked with the coach of his son's middle school team. Would the district be following the new protocol? No, he was told.<i> </i>During one of Benjamin's games a few weeks later, Davis saw two boys jump for a ball. They smashed heads and collapsed to the ground. "Their coach came out, patted them on their butts, and said, 'Go out there and play,'" Davis says. "No one gave them a concussion test, and no one pulled them out. I was like, <i>There has to be a better way."</i><br /><br />Davis gave his daughter and son strict orders: <i>under no circumstances do you head the ball.</i> But he felt selfish. Who was looking out for other people's children, especially the ones in helmets and shoulder pads? Both USA Hockey and Hockey Canada had prohibited body checking for players under age 13. Some people, including Omalu and<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/john-urschel-high-school-football_us_559d652ae4b05b1d028f8a06"> </a><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/john-urschel-high-school-football_us_559d652ae4b05b1d028f8a06">Baltimore Ravens tackle John Urschel</a>, were arguing that football should follow suit, and forbid tackling for children younger than 14. In Marshall, Texas, a retired doctor named Jim Harris already had helped convince a Boys &amp; Girls Club<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/04/sports/football/boys-and-girls-club-in-marshall-tex-to-end-tackle-football.html?_r=1"> </a><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/04/sports/football/boys-and-girls-club-in-marshall-tex-to-end-tackle-football.html?_r=1">to end a tackle football program</a> for 75 children between the ages of eight and 13.<br /><br />Davis took note. Yet the more he learned, the more he came to believe that Friday nights couldn't be ignored. A<a href="http://https//www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/Children/Sports-Related-Concussion/12%20Duma%20Rowson%20IOM%2020131.pdf"> </a><a href="http://https//www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/Children/Sports-Related-Concussion/12%20Duma%20Rowson%20IOM%2020131.pdf">2013 study of 40 high school players</a> in North Carolina found that they absorbed more than 16,500 combined head hits in a single season, while a <a href="http://www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/9902116/report-details-concussion-risks-high-school-athletes">NFL-funded National Academy of Sciences report</a> released the same year found that prep football players are nearly twice as likely to suffer concussions as their college counterparts. Boston University researchers haven't just diagnosed CTE in the brains of deceased former NFL and college football players; they've seen the disease's telltale tangles of a neuron-killing protein called <i>p-tau</i> in six athletes whose gridiron careers ended in high school, including Nathan Stiles, a 17-year-old who died from a football-induced brain bleed, and Paul Bright, who died from injuries sustained in a motorcycle accident at age 24.<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="3958px" data-original-width="4201px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/11/25/friday-night-lights-out-tk-body-image-1480109802.png?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div>"I think the whole mantra of flag football until [age] 14 is just a compromise for people who are afraid to address high school football," Davis says. "And I get that. Everyone grew up going to high school games. People are scared to have this conversation. Even my daughter was very nervous about it. She told me, 'Dad, I like going to games. I like hanging out with my friends.' It's part of America.<br /><br />"But what's the difference between a 14-year-old and a 17-year-old getting hit in the head? We know that kids are sustaining 600 to 1,500 collisions per season. It's unavoidable that there's going to be damage to the brain."<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="400px" data-original-width="1220px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/11/25/friday-night-lights-out-tk-body-image-1480109961.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">A Clark Country school bus (YouTube); a football game at Bishop Gorman High School in Las Vegas (photo by Tim Heitman-USA TODAY Sports); bioethicist Steven Miles, who has called for football to be removed from schools (YouTube)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><br /><b>Can that message win votes? </b>Davis divides the Clark County electorate into two groups, high school football diehards and everyone else. The first group is a tough sell: coaches, boosters, parents of current players. "They're all in denial," he says. But the second group? Davis believes he can win them over, the same way he won over his friend Andy Schaudt.<br /><br />Schaudt works for PostLaunch, a web marketing company that Davis uses for his business. When Davis approached him and a colleague with his plan—<i>I'm running for school board, I'm going to ban high school football, and I need your help</i>—the two responded with stunned silence. Yet as Davis explained his reasoning, Schaudt was intrigued. Like Davis, he played soccer growing up, and estimates he was knocked out "five or six times." He also used to work in health care, studying how medical devices were used—and misused—in the field.<br /><br />Schaudt thought about his previous academic work at Virginia Tech on driver safety, and how hard it is to change gratifying but harmful behaviors like texting while driving. He thought about the adoption of seat-belt laws, and how society eventually learns to mitigate risk. He began to see parallels with prep football. "What sports are we funding?" Schaudt says. "Are they hurting or helping? The number of Americans that go on to have jobs in professional football is so small. So what are our schools pushing this for?"<br /><br />Davis doesn't think that football should be outlawed, any more than boxing or mixed martial arts are illegal. If a parent wants to send their child to a private gym, or enroll that child in a private football program, well, it's a free country. Only don't ask schools to sponsor a concussion delivery system, and don't ask taxpayers to pick up the tab. Beyond abolishing high school football, Davis's platform calls for banning heading in soccer, instituting concussion protocol training for coaches in every sport, and forbidding Clark County teams from playing against outside schools that don't follow the same standards. "Schools have a mission of educating kids and protecting their welfare," he says.<br /><br />Recently, Davis received a phone call from a current member of the Clark County School Board. The member was upset. <i>What's wrong with high school football?</i> Davis outlined his case, mentioning that <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/no-tackling-in-practice-not-a-problem-in-ivy-league-football">Ivy League universities had eliminated tackling</a> during in-season football practices. That should tell you something, Davis said.<br /><br />"[The member] said, 'Well, Russ, that's the Ivy League. They're just concerned about education and the classroom achievement of their athletes,'" Davis says. "I was like, 'That's the point!'"<br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/zd_-zQtXN7d_5ut9J3J6TVU44helmiYXfWXEM-g82Ub6M9isGhbamzlpVxr47NgsHRygXGc53KbM-xFUX2keY5kyP7cZEo3IvudovxGgZYsmF9_oO_CBxcQ6cvVFP-rxXhv96Nh1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Phil Pascal campaigns for Russell Davis. Photo by Patrick Hruby</td></tr></tbody></table>Steven Miles shares Davis's exasperation. A University of Minnesota bioethics professor and longtime physician, Miles co-wrote a 2015 editorial in the <i>American Journal of Bioethics</i> that called for the removal of tackle football from schools—high schools and colleges. Early in his career, Miles worked in the brain disorders unit of a Veterans Administration hospital in Minneapolis. He still remembers a presentation on dementia pugilistica, a disease afflicting prizefighters now known as CTE. "It was pretty scary," he says. "I could never look at boxing the same way."<br /><br />Reviewing the scientific literature, Miles found no definitive proof that brain trauma suffered while playing youth football would inevitably produce the long-term problems suffered by some NFL retirees. There was plenty of evidence, however, that concussions and head hits were bad for high school athletes in the here and now, resulting in headaches, impaired memory, inability to focus and pay attention, absenteeism, and poor academic performance.<br /><br />Playing football, Miles concluded, wasn't simply dangerous—it increased the risk that children will be lousy students. Moreover, parental consent forms were troublingly vague, justifying football participation with statements like everything in life has risks. "There was no information on the CTE issue, no mention that your chances of going pro are worse than a Hail Mary pass, no acknowledgement that medical policies don't cover disability, long-term care, rehabilitation," he says.<br /><br />Miles' article was published shortly before the release of the Will Smith film <i>Concussion</i>, a fictionalized account of Omalu's CTE discovery. It drew national attention. The medical community, Miles says, was "uniformly supportive"—with one exception. "Consultants for football," he says.<br /><br />What about prep football coaches?<br /><br />"Yeah, I heard from a few," says Miles, who continues to give presentations based on his article to medical and community groups. "The initial comments were 'You're just going to take all the risks out of life' and blah blah blah, but more recently the coaches I've spoken with have been extremely thoughtful. They generally don't want to hurt kids. And they're grappling with something they honestly did not know."<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="846px" data-original-width="1220px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/11/25/friday-night-lights-out-tk-body-image-1480110349.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Liberty High School football Rich Muraco. Photo illustration by Caitlin Kelly; photos courtesy Rich Muraco (Muraco), and by Patrick Hruby (Liberty High School athletic offices)</td></tr></tbody></table></div><b>At first, Rich Muraco thought it was a joke</b>. Shortly after Davis launched his campaign, Muraco, the athletic director and football coach at Liberty High School in Las Vegas, received a phone call from a <i>USA Today</i> writer who had covered his team's run to the Nevada championship game the previous season.<br /><i><br /></i> <i>Hey, there's a guy running for school board and he wants to ban high school football.</i><br /><br />"I laughed," Muraco says. "I thought that maybe it was a publicity stunt, someone doing something controversial to get free coverage. But then all of the local [television] affiliates came out and interviewed me."<br /><br />Muraco sits behind a desk in his office, across from a framed football jersey signed by New York Giants quarterback Eli Manning. He has been coaching football for 14 years, guiding Liberty to six regional championships and two state title games. It would be easy group him with the football-loving voters Davis believes are in denial about the sport's potential dangers—people like Kenny Sanchez, the football coach at Liberty rival and nationally ranked private school Bishop Gorman,<a href="http://usatodayhss.com/2016/bishop-gorman-las-vegas-super-25-football-rankings-russell-davis-football-ban"> </a><a href="http://usatodayhss.com/2016/bishop-gorman-las-vegas-super-25-football-rankings-russell-davis-football-ban">who when asked about Davis by </a><a href="http://usatodayhss.com/2016/bishop-gorman-las-vegas-super-25-football-rankings-russell-davis-football-ban"><i>USA Today</i></a><a href="http://usatodayhss.com/2016/bishop-gorman-las-vegas-super-25-football-rankings-russell-davis-football-ban"> said</a>, "Cheerleading has more blown-out knees and concussions than football has. Are you going to rule out cheerleading now? Can you not ride a bike anymore? What's next, soccer? Where does it stop?"<br /><br />But pigeonholing Muraco would be a mistake. He moved from New York to Las Vegas to work as an elementary school physical education teacher, started helping the Liberty freshman football team as a favor to a friend, and had to be talked into taking the varsity job. He has a Strat-O-Matic football game on his shelf, and says his family won't play board games with him "because I have to win." Still, he doesn't live and die with the sport. Muraco considers himself an educator first, the sort of coach who makes sure his players have an all-you-can-eat spread of granola bars and peanut-butter-and-jelly sandwiches waiting for them after school—because, he says, "too many kids would come and get the free or reduced-price lunch, then have nothing else until they got home at night."<br /><br />Muraco cares about concussions. If he suspects that a player has suffered one, he pulls them off the field, even when they lobby to stay on. "Some kids get mad," Muraco says. "And that's a danger, because next time they may try to hide it." No player returns unless he's been cleared by a neurologist, and if anyone suffers two concussions in a single school year, they are shut down for the season. Muraco also warns his team about headaches, light sensitivity, and insomnia—all of which can be delayed symptoms of a brain injury. "We talk about being honest," he says. "You are not being weak or a wimp if you are having a problem with your brain. Speak up and seek help."<br /><br />In the spring of 2012, a former Liberty High player's uncle committed suicide and was posthumously diagnosed with CTE. It was Junior Seau, the former NFL linebacker. "That was close for us," Muraco says. Last year, Boston University researchers found that former NFL players who played tackle football as young children<a href="http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/12243012/ex-nfl-players-played-tackle-football-youth-more-likely-thinking-memory-problems"> </a><a href="http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/12243012/ex-nfl-players-played-tackle-football-youth-more-likely-thinking-memory-problems">were more likely to have thinking and memory problems as adults</a>. Should youth football be banned? "I don't think it would hurt at all, really, if kids weren't allowed to play tackle before high school," he says.<br /><br />And during high school?<br /><br />"That's a hard question."<br /><br />Muraco says he would never trade a child's health for a single win. Still, he sees a difference between Junior and his nephew Kimo—between nearly two decades of absorbing NFL-level hits to the head and a few seasons of prep football. He believes Davis's quest to eliminate the high school game is premature. "If it came to the point where it was undeniably dangerous—where the research was rock solid—I know for me, personally, I would have to say, 'All right, maybe it's not safe enough for high school kids, or shouldn't be in an educational setting,'" Muraco says.<br /><br />"But where I take issue is that he's using NFL statistics and data to justify it, and those are the most elite people playing for a number of years at the biggest, strongest, fastest, most violent level. In my experience, high school is nowhere near that realm."<br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/s-3G3XYXxcSRl5sOIbW6wkhD_T2CGXxAxb98kEJ3aAbZUMdpUOo7rhc8sHHfzaIcC1pAZzwIGAu-H2AQCqBXuhzgYad9kBfYkac46laarUhYUonYS7mkUkvfrCg5l7Fjfr4KSenP" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Pro Football Hall of Fame inductee Junior Seau was diagnosed with CTE. Photo by Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table>Just how risky is prep football, exactly? No one knows. Stories like that of Stiles—the 17-year-old diagnosed with CTE—are frightening, but rare. Studies like the ones being done at Purdue are suggestive, but far too small to be definitive. Talavage, the Purdue professor, believes that the sport can be made much safer by simply playing less of it; his research group has found that players who endure fewer than 900 hits in a season or 50 hits a week are much less likely to show signs of brain trauma. But he also worries that high school players may be especially vulnerable to long-term neurological harm because the brain doesn't fully mature until one's 20s—and in teenagers, areas associated with decision-making and impulse control are still developing.<br /><br />"Given what we know, it kind of makes sense that if you get hurt during those age periods, it could affect the development of your cognitive and social capabilities," Talavage says. "What happens to the teenage brain, specifically, with contact sports is an absolutely critical question that needs to be addressed."<br /><br />While researching his <i>Journal of Brain Injury</i> article, Miles spoke to University of Minnesota environmental health sciences professor Susan Gerberich, who had been studying contact sports brain injuries for decades. He had a simple question. <i>Pretend I'm a parent. You're the doctor. Walk me through how you would inform me about football's risks so I can decide whether or not to let my son play. </i><br /><br />"She looked shocked," Miles says. Gerberich couldn't answer.<br /><br />The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that children under age 18<a href="http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/08/24/peds.2011-1165"> </a><a href="http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/08/24/peds.2011-1165">avoid the sport of box</a>ing and <a href="http://www.aappublications.org/content/28/8/15">the nutritional supplement creatine.</a> It does not discourage<a href="http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2015/10/20/peds.2015-3282"> </a><a href="http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2015/10/20/peds.2015-3282">youth tackle football.</a> Steven DeKosky, an Alzheimer's disease researcher who worked with Omalu to identify CTE in Webster's brain, says that parents preventing their children from playing football is an<a href="http://www.gainesville.com/news/20151228/uf-professor-dr-steven-dekosky-depicted-in-concussion-movie-for-work-done-at-pitt/1"> </a><a href="http://www.gainesville.com/news/20151228/uf-professor-dr-steven-dekosky-depicted-in-concussion-movie-for-work-done-at-pitt/1">"understandable overreaction, but an overreaction."</a><br /><br />Doctors affiliated with the sport are more emphatic. In<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/29/joseph-maroon-and-julian-bailes-weighing-the-child/"> </a><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/29/joseph-maroon-and-julian-bailes-weighing-the-child/">a </a><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/29/joseph-maroon-and-julian-bailes-weighing-the-child/"><i>Washington Times</i></a><a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/29/joseph-maroon-and-julian-bailes-weighing-the-child/"> editorial</a>, Julian Bailes, a medical advisor to the National Football League Players' Association and Pop Warner, and Joe Maroon, a longtime NFL advisor and Steelers team neurosurgeon, called concern over youth football concussions a "near-hysteria," noting that while roughly a million children play high school football every year, fewer than 200 CTE cases have been identified. Kevin Guskiewicz, a University of North Carolina researcher and member of the NFL's Head, Neck and Spine Committee, allowed his sons to play the sport. He argues that<a href="http://www.wral.com/unc-ch-researcher-says-concussion-has-good-bad-impact/15203054/"> </a><a href="http://www.wral.com/unc-ch-researcher-says-concussion-has-good-bad-impact/15203054/">the increased likelihood of childhood obesity and diabetes</a> that comes from physical inactivity—including <i>not</i> playing football—is riskier than the game itself.<br /><br />University of Minnesota neurosurgery professor and NFL consultant Uzma Samadani also<a href="http://www.startribune.com/despite-rising-concerns-over-concussions-this-doctor-prescribes-football/391551251/"> </a><a href="http://www.startribune.com/despite-rising-concerns-over-concussions-this-doctor-prescribes-football/391551251/">lets her son play prep football</a>. After reading about Miles, she authored <a href="http://m.startribune.com/counterpoint-call-to-ban-football-collides-with-the-facts/360510031/?section=opinion">a </a><a href="http://m.startribune.com/counterpoint-call-to-ban-football-collides-with-the-facts/360510031/?section=opinion"><i>Minneapolis Star-Tribune</i></a><a href="http://m.startribune.com/counterpoint-call-to-ban-football-collides-with-the-facts/360510031/?section=opinion"> editorial</a> contending that football is less risky than skiing, bicycling, and horseback riding; that efforts to prohibit the sport distract from more preventable causes of brain injury such as gunfire and car accidents; and that because adolescents' still-developing brains make them prone to impulsive behavior, they need football in order to learn how to assess and manage risk.<br /><br />"Ultimately, if we do not let our children play football, they may choose to skateboard off the roof," Samadani wrote. "This type of activity is what they are biologically programmed to do."<br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="409px" data-original-width="653px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/11/25/friday-night-lights-out-tk-body-image-1480110538.jpg?output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The Liberty High School team, playing football instead of skateboarding off roofs. Courtesy Rich Muraco</td></tr></tbody></table><br />Historically, football has responded to injury concerns with reforms. Skull-smashing, rugby-like scrums gave way to forward passing and a less congested line of scrimmage. Plastic shells and heavy facemasks replaced leather helmets. Spearing blows and spinal injuries prompted an emphasis on head-up, see-what-you-hit tackling. Today, brain-injury awareness has led the California Interscholastic Federation to reduce full-contact practice time for prep football and adopt stricter rules to diagnose and treat concussions. Fifty states and the District of Columbia have passed youth sports concussion laws. Many high schools have purchased expensive helmets that purport to reduce concussion risk. USA Football, the NFL's youth arm and the sport's national governing body, has claimed its "Heads Up" safer tackling program does the same.<br /><br />Is it enough? Again, no one knows. Most experts agree that less hitting is good, but the<a href="http://https//www.washingtonian.com/2014/12/02/can-a-better-football-helmet-save-your-kids-brain/"> </a><a href="http://https//www.washingtonian.com/2014/12/02/can-a-better-football-helmet-save-your-kids-brain/">evidence for safer helmets is inconclusive.</a> Earlier this year, the <i>New York Times</i> reported<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/sports/football/nfl-concussions-youth-program-heads-up-football.html"> that USA Football's Heads Up claims were unsupported</a> by the same scientific study the organization had touted. Despite a century of tweaks, football's violent essence—players trying to knock one another prone—remains intact.<br /><br />"When I watch the NFL on TV, I see players get up and wobble around and spin and almost fall down, and still their own medical and coaching staffs can't see they've had severe head injuries," Miles says. "It astonishes me. They can't protect the pros with an army of medical observers. They don't even have trainers for many high school football practices. And you don't even have to have a concussion to have brain trauma. So what can you say?"<br /><hr /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="400px" data-original-width="1220px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/11/25/friday-night-lights-out-tk-body-image-1480112517.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Cedar Hill High School (Texas) cheerleaders (photo by Tim Heitman-USA TODAY Sports); Team USA at the high school football International Bowl (photo by Jerome Miron-USA TODAY Sports); Grayson High School (Georgia) fans (photo by Dale Zanine-USA Today Sports)</div><b><br /></b> <b>Muraco doesn't read scientific journals, </b>but he believes prep football is safer now than when he played. Back then, woozy athletes received smelling salts before heading back into games; today Liberty players are given computerized neurocognitive tests to help determine how long they should be held out of competition. (The effectiveness of said tests is <a href="http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/8297794/neuropsychological-testing-concussions-not-panacea">hotly debated</a>.) The team largely has eliminated hitting during practices. Muraco's coaches now teach "hawk" tackling—<a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/what-american-football-can-learn-from-the-rugby-world-cup">a rugby-style technique</a>, popularized by Seattle Seahawks coach Pete Carroll, that de-emphasizes the use of the helmet as a weapon and has players use their shoulders and arms to wrap opponents and bring them to the ground. "I can't remember the last time I lost a starter to a concussion where he couldn't play for two to three weeks," Muraco says. "And we've had very few concussions, total, the last seven to eight years."<br /><br />Nobody believes that prep football can be made completely safe. The sport's advocates believe that its rewards outweigh its risks. Football, they argue, teaches perseverance. Builds toughness. Builds <i>men</i>. From its earliest days, football has been intertwined with all-American notions of masculinity. In 1900, Chicago mayor Carter Harrison II said that "if you legislate against football and boxing, the next generation will be a generation of sissy boys"; in 1958, radio commentator Bill Stern lauded football as a Cold War bulwark against Soviet encroachment, stating that boys "like to hoot and holler and wave pennants, and if they can't do it at the football stadium, you may well be sure that they will do it in the [Communist] party cell."<br /><br />Fifty-eight years later, little has changed. Former NFL player Kevin Green <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/esquire_fnt/2014/12/how_well_intentioned_adults_want_to_end_a_sport_they_simply_don_t_understand.html" target="_blank">calls football "the perfect answer"</a> to the "primal aggressiveness, passion and propensity toward violence" pent up inside some young men—boys who have gone on, Green writes, to become "the great soldiers who've protected us, the police who've enforced our laws, and the industrialists who've driven us to build and better the world around us." <i>New York </i>magazine writer Jonathan Chait<a href="http://nymag.com/chait-2014-9-6/index2.html"> </a><a href="http://nymag.com/chait-2014-9-6/index2.html">lauds the sport</a><u> </u>as a supervised channel for boys' "chauvinistic belligerence," and a reminder that "not all teenagers are cut out for chess club." In a <a href="http://mmqb.si.com/2013/10/24/football-defending-the-sport-a-clear-mission">2013 column for <i>Sports Illustrated's</i> MMQB website</a>, Arizona prep coach Jeff Scurran<a href="http://mmqb.si.com/2013/10/24/football-defending-the-sport-a-clear-mission"> </a><u>wrote that football "produces tough hombres" </u>and is the "last bastion of discipline" in a nation that accepts mediocrity in "almost every part of society." Baltimore Ravens coach John Harbaugh contends that football not only teaches lessons no other sport can—sorry, tennis—but<a href="http://www.baltimoreravens.com/news/article-1/Why-Football-Matters-By-John-Harbaugh-/4aeda6f9-1ade-4a1a-88a5-51ef73e20a9a"> also saves lives</a>.<br /><br />"It's remarkable how as you move forward in time, the belief that football instills these particular masculine virtues in boys really does persist," says Kathleen Bachynski, a visiting scholar at the American Academy of Arts and Sciences who wrote her<a href="http://academiccommons.columbia.edu/catalog/ac:198083"> </a><u><a href="http://academiccommons.columbia.edu/catalog/ac:198083">Columbia University dissertation</a> on the history of youth football as a public health issue. </u>"There's a longstanding belief that boys have this sort of inherent violence, and if you don't channel it into something organized and supervised, it might turn into something dangerous. Pro-football arguments have always been driven by these moral concerns."<br /><img src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/yEnPr3KjcNyoLYEBFFNZk4DWmftzyh10S_EsTV3uRlpfguhSZ4QXq2pH5gb1Ide8niNNw7te4Z_mWk0qF3J35DqyAzm3JjrfNMsUg2ysVheniJjG1RvAg2UWodW0BpSmkLuIMXZi" /><br /><div class="photo-credit">John Harbaugh believes football saves lives. Photo by Robert Deutsch-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Davis invited Muraco to his town hall meeting. The coach declined. He has seen the good the sport can do. Muraco treasures the relationships he has built with his players, some of whom have returned to Liberty High a decade after graduating to help out with the team. He loves seeing young men work hard at the sport—lifting weights and studying game footage after school—and then applying the same effort to their coursework. "Football keeps a lot of these kids out of trouble, on track academically," he says. "Without sports in their life, they may not get that high school diploma."<br /><br />A football team, Muraco says, creates a sense of community. Of belonging. Liberty High's student body is diverse, a melting pot of whites, Hispanics, African-Americans, and Pacific Islanders. "Socio-economically, we have some kids who live in public housing, and some kids who come from close to million-dollar homes," Muraco says. "But everyone gets along. No fights. I attribute that to our sense of pride. Our school is kind of known throughout the area, and a lot of that is related to football. People aren't going around bragging about how their [Advanced Placement] test scores are."<br /><br />Eliminate high school football, Muraco says, and all of that will be lost. The band. The cheerleaders. The color guard. The pep rallies. The homecoming dance. "Your football program sets the tone for your school year," he says. "Good team, good school spirit, kids behave better on campus, the games bring the school and community together. Without that, you'd lose a huge chunk of your identity and culture."<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="400px" data-original-width="1220px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/11/25/friday-night-lights-out-tk-body-image-1480110828.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">A high school band performs before the 2015 Pro Football Hall of Fame induction ceremony (photo by Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports); Eagle Stadium in Allen, Texas, which cost $70 million (Wikimedia Commons)</div><b><br /></b> <b>John Gerdy disagrees. </b>A former Southeastern Conference associate commissioner and the son of a prep football coach, Gerdy has been around the sport for most of his life. Like Davis, he believes it's too dangerous for schools, regardless of well-meaning efforts to make the game safer.<br /><br />He also thinks that football is a lousy investment.<br /><br />"It's by far the most expensive sport," says Gerdy, executive director of the nonprofit Music For Everyone and author of <i>Air Ball: American Education's Failed Experiment with Elite Athletics</i> and <i>Ball or Bands: Football vs. Music as an Educational and Community Investment</i>. "So much time, effort, emotion, and energy is spent on it, too. But we have to ask a fundamental question about what kind of return we're getting."<br /><br />High school football isn't cheap.<a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-10-28/news/ct-met-football-money-main-20111028_1_high-school-football-football-field-coaching"> </a><a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-10-28/news/ct-met-football-money-main-20111028_1_high-school-football-football-field-coaching">A 2011 </a><a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-10-28/news/ct-met-football-money-main-20111028_1_high-school-football-football-field-coaching"><i>Chicago Tribune</i></a><a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-10-28/news/ct-met-football-money-main-20111028_1_high-school-football-football-field-coaching"> analysis</a> found that some Chicago–area schools spent more than $100,000 a year on the sport. A<a href="http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/high-school/sportsdaydfw/2011/11/17/special-report-an-inside-look-at-the-finances-behind-hs-football-in-the-dallas-area"><i> Dallas Morning News</i></a><a href="http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/high-school/sportsdaydfw/2011/11/17/special-report-an-inside-look-at-the-finances-behind-hs-football-in-the-dallas-area"> study</a> of 31 Dallas–area school districts published the same year found that schools spent an average of almost $230,000 on football; one district, Plano, spent just over $442,000 per school.<br /><br />Where does the money go? In Chicago, the <i>Tribune </i>discovered expenses ranging from $1 million turf fields to $2,500 video scouting software to $250 helmets; in Dallas, the <i>Morning News </i>calculated that the average head coach's salary was almost $91,000. Last year,<a href="http://al.com/"> </a><a href="http://al.com/">AL.com</a><a href="http://highschoolsports.al.com/news/article/-6555916786341812140/alabamas-high-school-football-coaching-salaries-soar-past-120000-search-for-how-much-your-coach-makes/"> reported</a> that the highest-paid prep coach in Alabama, Josh Niblett, made $125,000, while eight other coaches in the state earned at least $100,000 annually.<br /><br />Four years ago, a school district in the Dallas suburb of Allen, Texas, spent $60 million on a 18,000-seat high school football stadium—and then spent<a href="http://www.dallasnews.com/news/news/2015/05/31/allen-s-eagle-stadium-to-reopen-for-graduation-after-10-million-plus-in-fixes"> </a><a href="http://www.dallasnews.com/news/news/2015/05/31/allen-s-eagle-stadium-to-reopen-for-graduation-after-10-million-plus-in-fixes">another $10 million a year after the building opened</a> to repair cracking concrete.<br /><br />At Liberty High, Muraco says, he receives about $8,000 per year from Clark County for football—more than the roughly $1,500 he's given for each of the school's other sports, but not enough to cover $60,000 in annual expenses, including a video scouting system, equipment bags, travel suits for his players, and $2,500 for footballs. Fundraising by player parents and concession-stand sales at home games make up the difference. "You don't have to spend that much," Muraco says. "I think a bare-bones budget for football could be $15,000 to $20,000. But we're trying to be an elite program."<br /><br />Prep football can be a break-even proposition, or even help fund other student activities, but that's not the norm. To wit, of the more than 20 school districts that provided prep football financial records to the <i>Dallas Morning News </i>in 2011, just three reported a net profit over a five-year period. Eleven districts lost more than $2 million, and the Dallas district was nearly $11 million in the red.<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="3958px" data-original-width="4201px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/11/25/friday-night-lights-out-tk-body-image-1480110900.png?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div>When Davis was planning his school board run, he considered following the money. How much was being spent on high school football in Clark County, which has 33 teams? What else <a href="http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/education/tighter-budget-will-force-clark-county-schools-increase-class-sizes-next-year">could schools facing budget cutbacks </a>do with those dollars? "We decided against it," Davis says. "We are talking about the health and safety of kids. I didn't want the conversation to come down to the economic aspect."<br /><br />Gerdy is less conflicted. Education funding is finite, he says, and post-Great Recession cutbacks by cash-strapped state governments have hit schools hard. More money for football means less money for things like computers and textbooks. For every dollar spent on the sport, shouldn't educators demand commensurate returns?<br /><br />Last year, Gerdy wrote an article for <i>Trusteeship</i>, a magazine aimed at university and college board members, that<a href="http://agb.org/trusteeship/2015/septemberoctober/artists-athletes-and-governing-boards-who-plays-and-who-wins"> </a><a href="http://agb.org/trusteeship/2015/septemberoctober/artists-athletes-and-governing-boards-who-plays-and-who-wins">compared football and music programs in junior high and high schools</a>. Music, he argued, fosters individual creativity; football focuses on winning, and places important decisions in the hands of adult coaches. Music has widespread, cross-gender appeal; football is basically for a small group of boys. Music is a lifetime participatory activity; playing tackle football after age 30 is an excellent way to end up in an emergency room.<br /><br />In the classroom, Gerdy noted, music programs have been shown to have a direct impact on improved math, writing, reading, logic, and foreign-language skills. By contrast, investing in football yields the occasional future NFL quarterback. While both activities can build character—teaching discipline, persistence, and teamwork—only one can do so without repetitive head hits and<a href="http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/2014/12/14/Is-this-the-end-of-football-Pittsburgh-James-Bukes-liability/stories/201412140100"> multimillion-dollar judgments</a> against school districts via football-induced brain injury lawsuits.<br /><br />"If you were keeping score like in a football game, the final wouldn't be close," Gerdy says. "It would be like 55-20. You get a much better return from music. Football heaps a tremendous amount of resources on a few elite kids, and pushes everyone else to the sidelines to watch. And we're doing this in one of the most obese nations on the planet!<br /><br />"As parents, teachers, board members, we have to ask: Is football meeting all the justifications that we have for it? And if not, then what is our responsibility?"<br /><img src="https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/cAEJKaglr5AI-FPiL13YTdfyUtuB0McHH4Oj4b_oldGKP8Dvv1wBIxZBCwnvBC-B9NWugw_dLKrefIjyXC2khjIw1ThZ4MKJXtoqZPfUw00pYXhCOSXxiNwkltAss3GStREm8kPF" /><br /><div class="photo-credit">Author and school football critic John Gerdy. Courtesy John Gerdy via Twitter</div><br />Is high school football necessary? Four years ago, <a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/the-case-against-high-school-sports/309447/">the </a><a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/the-case-against-high-school-sports/309447/"><i>Atlantic's</i></a><a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/the-case-against-high-school-sports/309447/"> Amanda Ripley reported</a>, the school district in Premont, Texas, was in trouble. State officials were threatening to shut it down for financial mismanagement and academic failure, and budget shortfalls already had led to the closing of a middle school campus and a mold-infested high school science lab. To cut costs, superintendent Ernest Singleton took a drastic step. He suspended all sports, including football.<br /><br />Singleton had done the math: Premont prep football cost about $1,300 per player, while actual math instruction cost less than half that amount. By eliminating athletics, he saved $150,000, which allowed him to give teachers raises. Reaction to the move was largely incredulous, and a handful of students, including one football player, transferred to schools where they could keep playing sports.<br /><br />For the students who remained, however, everything changed. <i>The Atlantic </i>reported that in the school's first semester without football, 80 percent of the student body passed their classes, compared to 50 percent the previous fall. About 160 people attended parent-teacher night; just six showed up a year earlier. A former quarterback for the Premont football team told the magazine that instead of practicing the sport for ten or more hours a week, he was able to "focus. There was just all this extra time. You never got behind on your work." Administrators noticed students as a whole were better behaved and more attentive in class. Even Richard Russell, a history teacher who had coached the school's football team for two decades, said, "Learning is going on in 99 percent of the classrooms now, compared to two percent before."<br /><br />Gerdy understands the thrill of athletic competition; he was an All-American basketball player at Davidson College. Similar to Davis, he wants to take the <i>high school </i>out of high school football, but the game itself can go on. How? By following the lead of basketball, swimming, and baseball—youth sports dominated by high-level club and travel teams. Privatize prep football, Gerdy argues, and let the $10-billion-a-year<a href="http://www.johngerdy.com/a-true-public-service-for-the-nfl/"> NFL pick up the tab</a> for training its future workforce and fan base.<br /><br />And if that's not enough? If schools still need the football-infused sense of community that Muraco describes? Gerdy thinks there's a way to square that circle, too. A way to capture all of the sport's benefits while eliminating its risks. To preserve football's grace, beauty, and athleticism, and <i>still</i> cut costs.<br /><br />"What's wrong with flag football?" he says.<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="983px" data-original-width="1500px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/11/25/friday-night-lights-out-tk-body-image-1480111036.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Russell Davis campaigns door to door in Las Vegas. Photo illustration by Caitlin Kelly; photos by Patrick Hruby (Davis), courtesy Russell Davis (flyer)</div><b><br /></b> <b>Two weeks before the Clark County primary election</b>, Davis walks from house to house in a north Las Vegas neighborhood, trying to hand out campaign flyers—the same ones he was giving away in the parking lot of a nearby Walmart, before store security shooed him away.<br /><br />Most doors remain shut. A few residents wave Davis off. <i>Good luck. No thanks.</i> He's used to rejection. A month earlier, Davis called his parents. It was Mother's Day, but his father, Mike, wanted to chat. Mike had been reading online articles about his son's proposed high school football ban. More specifically, he had been reading the comments on those articles.<br /><br />"Wow, Russell," Mike said. "They called you a vagina!"<br /><br />"Dad, I'm a Nazi and a communist too," Davis said.<br /><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><iframe allowfullscreen="" class="YOUTUBE-iframe-video" data-thumbnail-src="https://i.ytimg.com/vi/oCsrzPX4pUY/0.jpg" frameborder="0" height="266" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oCsrzPX4pUY?feature=player_embedded" width="320"></iframe></div><br />On election night, the incumbent Linda Young retained her school board seat. Davis received 1,182 votes—roughly eight percent of the total number cast, placing him fourth out of six candidates. He was disappointed, but also proud. "We always talk about banning football like the five stages of grief," Davis says. "First, denial. Then anger. Now I think we're entering the bargaining stage—the Ivy League schools not having tackle practices, Pop Warner eliminating kickoffs, the NFL penalizing head-to-head contact. People are afraid to bring this up, but it needs to be a debate. Because this is coming."<br /><br />Thirty-five years ago, a Catholic bishop named Walter F. Sullivan banned tackle football at the Virginia grade schools under his purview. His biographer later said that Sullivan<a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/what-would-jesus-think-about-football"> </a><a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/what-would-jesus-think-about-football">believed it was the most controversial and unpopular thing he ever did</a>—and he once told a military crowd that working on nuclear weapons was immoral. Today, people like<a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/highlight/there-is-no-war-on-football-but-there-is-a-war-on-the-nfl-and-ignorance"> </a><a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/highlight/there-is-no-war-on-football-but-there-is-a-war-on-the-nfl-and-ignorance"><i>Monday Night Football</i></a><a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/highlight/there-is-no-war-on-football-but-there-is-a-war-on-the-nfl-and-ignorance"> analyst John Gruden</a>,<a href="http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/danny-kanell-questions-concussion-research-says-war-on-football-is-real/"> </a><a href="http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/danny-kanell-questions-concussion-research-says-war-on-football-is-real/">ESPN radio host Danny Kanell</a>,<u> and</u><a href="http://j.school/post/134879378480/football-is-under-attack"> </a><a href="http://j.school/post/134879378480/football-is-under-attack">sports-tier cable pundit Jason Whitlock</a> complain of a cultural War on Football, with the nation's favorite pastime unfairly besieged by liberals, nanny-staters, agenda-driven scientists, the <i>New York Times</i>, and other shadowy forces.<br /><br />Only that couldn't be farther from the truth. In Texas, local governments have approved<a href="http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-stadium-arms-race-snap-story.html"> </a><a href="http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-stadium-arms-race-snap-story.html">two more $60-million-plus prep stadiums</a>. In Illinois,<a href="http://www.dailynews.com/sports/20151028/judge-dismisses-concussions-lawsuit-against-high-school-group"> </a><a href="http://www.dailynews.com/sports/20151028/judge-dismisses-concussions-lawsuit-against-high-school-group">a federal judge dismissed a class-action concussion lawsuit</a> against the state's high school association, not because teenagers weren't suffering serious brain injuries but because imposing broader financial liability could potentially harm the game,<i> </i>even "causing it to be abandoned." When a high school assistant coach wrote a column for <i>Sports Illustrated</i><a href="http://mmqb.si.com/2013/10/24/high-school-football-coach-questions-ethics-of-sport"><i> </i></a><a href="http://mmqb.si.com/2013/10/24/high-school-football-coach-questions-ethics-of-sport">stating that he struggled to rationalize putting children in harm's way</a> and that he believes it is only a matter of time before medical research buries football under the "undeniable truth," he did so anonymously, like some sort of Middle Eastern political dissident.<br /><br />The high school in Premont, Texas, that saved money and boosted academics by dumping football? This fall,<a href="http://www.wfaa.com/news/friday-night-lights-returns-to-south-texas-high-school-after-5-year-wait/324906177"> </a><a href="http://www.wfaa.com/news/friday-night-lights-returns-to-south-texas-high-school-after-5-year-wait/324906177">it brought the sport back.</a><br /><br />America loves football. Davis believes that we love our children more. He plans to run for the school board again; in the meantime, he has been lobbying Young to hold a public hearing on prep football. His old boss in Washington, Senator Bryan, had a favorite saying about campaigning: <i>Give me one person, and I've got a speech for them.</i> If Davis ever does get elected—if Americans ever turn out the lights on Friday nights—it will happen the same way any major change happens, political or otherwise: one mind, and one vote, at a time. "This is going to be an enormous hill to climb," Davis says. "It's like telling people, 'Hey, sorry, but you can't drive anymore.'"<br /><img src="https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/2VdBNCayu6RawW93I8CZ8dQM5XrTGSSQSRdhVPy8OijkIu5BTsu7bxlN47YAhO3ryDSCfcLBJ0jQ-ePpHLvv4SWhPdQmebWoiZUs8q4nX68Nq_yC1HBXIc1ZUajjDBcetBnhNLfH" /><br /><div class="photo-credit">'Monday Night Football' analyst Jon Gruden believes that there is a War on Football. Photo by Kim Klement-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />On the morning Davis goes door to door, only one man wants to chat: a retired technician named John Stephens, who happens to be watering his plants. Stephens' children have long since graduated high school, but he still pays attention, and he still votes. The biggest issue facing local schools, he says, involves a cross-dressing man he recently met at a nearby grocery store. <i>So, what restroom does he use? </i>This goes on for about ten minutes, until Davis finally interjects.<br /><br />"I'm running on an issue I feel strongly about. Protecting kids in contact sports."<br /><br />Stephens nods.<br /><br />"One way to do that is to ban high school football."<br /><br />Davis makes his pitch. Stephens nods some more. "That's gonna be hard," he says. "But I would not debate you in saying that it shouldn't be done." When Davis finishes talking, Stephens asks him for a flyer. "I might even decide to vote for you," he says. "Tell you what, if anybody I know says they <i>are</i> voting for you, I won't tell them not to. How's that?" Stephens laughs. Davis hands him a piece of paper. It's a start.Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-60602988883132677302016-09-06T08:50:00.001-04:002016-09-06T08:51:08.856-04:00Dangerous Deference?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R_gXEHTUAGw/V867Ml-wAFI/AAAAAAAADok/vG8quxxlGLo1jY0SPnHMANRetdl0rSWBgCLcB/s1600/a-new-pop-warner-lawsuit-raises-hard-questions-about-the-future-of-youth-tackle-football-1472846202.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-R_gXEHTUAGw/V867Ml-wAFI/AAAAAAAADok/vG8quxxlGLo1jY0SPnHMANRetdl0rSWBgCLcB/s1600/a-new-pop-warner-lawsuit-raises-hard-questions-about-the-future-of-youth-tackle-football-1472846202.jpg" /></a></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>A new Pop Warner lawsuit raises hard questions about how we regulate youth tackle football.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | September 2016</attribution></div><br /><b><span class="drop-cap">T</span></b><b>o understand what<a href="http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/09/01/pop-warner-youth-football-lawsuit-concussions-cte"> </a><a href="http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/09/01/pop-warner-youth-football-lawsuit-concussions-cte">a new potential class action lawsuit filed last week against Pop Warner and other youth football-related organizations over brain damage</a> could mean for the future of the sport,&nbsp;</b>start with helmets.<br /><br /><br />No, not those helmets. Not the heavy, foam-filled, hard plastic shells America is strapping onto the heads of its eight-year-olds before sending them out to hit and tackle one another, just like they do in the National Football League. Think novelty toy helmets. The kind you give a child to play <i>with</i>, not in, and that maybe end up on a shelf in the kitchen, flipped over and filled with candy.<br /><br />Earlier this year, sports safety advocate and litigation consultant Kimberly Archie spent a day on Capitol Hill, lobbying Congress about brain injuries. During a meeting with House committee staffers, she produced two football helmets. One was a toy. The other was real, like the one worn by her son, Paul Bright Jr., who played eight years of Pop Warner football, later suffered mood and behavior problems,<a href="http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-cte-death-20160813-snap-story.html"> </a><a href="http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-cte-death-20160813-snap-story.html">died in a motorcycle accident at age 24, and subsequently was diagnosed with Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy (CTE),</a> a neurodegenerative disease linked to repetitive head trauma and found in the brains of many deceased football players.<br /><div class="read-more"><br /></div>The design of the toy helmet, Archie explained, was subject to series of federal safety regulations<a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Education/childrens-products/"> </a><a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Education/childrens-products/">intended to shield children under age 12 from harm</a>: <a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Education/Lead/Total-Lead-Content/">minimal levels of lead</a>, because lead can be toxic;<a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Education/Business-Guidance/Small-Parts-for-Toys-and-Childrens-Products/"> </a><a href="http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Business--Manufacturing/Business-Education/Business-Guidance/Small-Parts-for-Toys-and-Childrens-Products/">no particularly small parts</a>, because kids can swallow them and choke. Commonsense protections, too often born from preventable tragedy. <br /><br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">Doing a presentation on the Hill tomorrow on why do toy helmets have more federal regulations than the 1 Paul wore? <a href="https://www.blogger.com/%3C/p">— Kimberly Archie (@kimberlyarchie) </a><a href="https://twitter.com/kimberlyarchie/statuses/734549370947932160">May 23, 2016</a></blockquote><br />Meanwhile, the real helmet was subject to safety standards set by the National Operating Committee on Standards for Athletic Equipment (NOCSAE), a nonprofit funded by the sporting goods industry. Problem was, NOCSAE's rules only covered adult helmets, not youth models, even though scientific evidence suggests that biological differences between adults and children make the latter uniquely vulnerable to brain injury.<br /><br />"I would tell them, 'We're going to play with one helmet, and with the other, we're going to put it on your kids' heads and go do mini car crashes,'" Archie says. "Everyone just looked at me and didn't know what to say. It doesn't make sense."<br /><br />Archie could end up changing that. Along with another mother, Jo Cornell, whose son also played Pop Warner, suffered behavior problems, took his own life, and was posthumously diagnosed with CTE, Archie is a named plaintiff on the new lawsuit, which argues that Pop Warner, NOCSAE, and USA Football (the sport's national youth governing body, funded by the NFL) irresponsibly exposed children to both brain damage and increased risk of such.<br /><br />Beyond its specific legal arguments, the suit raises a larger question: Should society view and regulate youth tackle football and its equipment through a lens of child protection like novelty helmets, or continue to take the largely hands-off approach we traditionally have reserved for sports?<br />Filed in U.S. District Court in California by Los Angeles–based trial lawyer Tom Girardi—<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/08/us/edward-l-masry-73-pugnacious-lawyer-dies.html?_r=0">one of the real-life </a><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/08/us/edward-l-masry-73-pugnacious-lawyer-dies.html?_r=0"><i>Erin Brockovich</i></a><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/08/us/edward-l-masry-73-pugnacious-lawyer-dies.html?_r=0"> attorneys</a>—the suit seeks to represent every current and former Pop Warner player since 1997 and contends that Pop Warner, NOCSAE, and USA Football failed to uphold their duties to provide for the safety and health of child athletes, some as young as five years old. It additionally asserts that all three organizations misled and deceived parents and children about youth football's brain damage risks.<br /><br />Specifically, the suit alleges that:<br /><br />* Pop Warner deceivingly advertised itself as a "safety-first organization in which children play for coaches trained in proper tackling techniques," including a "Heads Up" coaching program developed and promoted by USA Football and the NFL. Both USA Football and Pop Warner touted preliminary, non-peer-reviewed research showing that Heads Up reduced concussion and injury risk among youth players—<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/28/sports/football/nfl-concussions-youth-program-heads-up-football.html">even though that claim subsequently was found to be overstated and inflated.</a><br /><br />* Pop Warner claimed that its volunteers and coaches were extensively trained, but in a deposition given by executive director Jon Butler in<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/09/us/pop-warner-concussion-lawsuit-settlement-player-suicide/"> </a><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/09/us/pop-warner-concussion-lawsuit-settlement-player-suicide/">a separate brain injury case</a>, he admitted that the national Pop Warner office does not check whether coaches receive such training, and that his organization does not employ personnel with "a medical background, athletic training background, or physical education background."<br /><br />* Pop Warner failed to ensure that children were using the safest possible helmets, instead deferring to NOCASE,<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2014/05/15/football-helmets-concussions-safety-nocsae/9149679/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2014/05/15/football-helmets-concussions-safety-nocsae/9149679/">which as previously mentioned does not have a youth-specific helmet standard</a>.<br /><br />"If your kid is at the public pool during the summer, the lifeguard has to have appropriate training, because people can drown," Archie says. "It's a much higher standard than youth football. Frankly, a nail technician has more regulation to do fake nails."<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="716px" data-original-width="1080px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/09/05/a-new-pop-warner-lawsuit-raises-hard-questions-about-the-future-of-youth-tackle-football-body-image-1473102257.jpg?output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Paul Bright Jr. at age 14. Courtesy Kimberly Archie</div><br />Archie describes her son, Paul, as a sweet young man who loved his job as a Hollywood set caterer. She told the <i>Los Angeles Times </i>that she was somewhat surprised by his CTE diagnosis, given that he only played Pop Warner and a year of high school football. Given her knowledge of traumatic brain injury, however, she can look back and see how the disease—which, in his case, was in an early stage—was affecting his behavior and judgment.<br /><br />Archie knows that litigation can't possibly make up for his absence, nor for the pain it has caused her family. Still, she hopes that a successful case can keep other families from going through the same thing, in part by holding Pop Warner, USA Football and NOCSAE accountable for what the lawsuit asserts are their ongoing failings to protect children, and in part by asking the rest of us to reconsider the way we think about safety and responsibility in youth football.<br /><br />Historically, Americans have granted youth sports—even violent-collision sports—tremendous latitude. You can answer to<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/13/parents-investigated-letting-children-walk-alone/25700823/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/04/13/parents-investigated-letting-children-walk-alone/25700823/">Child Protective Services for letting your children walk alone in your neighborhood</a>, but not for dropping them off at a boxing gym, or enrolling them in a MMA clinic, or allowing them to bash helmets on the line of scrimmage. The prevailing legal and cultural attitude is that sports can be dangerous, sure, but they're also good, and the benefits outweigh the risks—so let's not discourage or prevent participation through regulatory oversight or added costs. Last October, for example,<a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/concussions-lawsuit-against-illinois-high-school-association-dismissed-by-illinois-judge/"> </a><a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/news/concussions-lawsuit-against-illinois-high-school-association-dismissed-by-illinois-judge/">an Illinois state judge dismissed a brain damage lawsuit brought by football players against the state's high school sports association</a>, writing that "imposing broader liability on this defendant would certainly change the sport of football and potentially harm it or cause it to be abandoned."<br /><br />In other words, making football organizers more responsible for the harm it can cause to minors could also make the sport too expensive and/or litigious to play.<br /><br />However, increased understanding and awareness of brain trauma has begun to change this calculus. Marked by<a href="http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/15210245/slight-one-year-increase-number-youth-playing-football-data-shows"> </a><a href="http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/15210245/slight-one-year-increase-number-youth-playing-football-data-shows">declining participation</a>, an<a href="http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/01/youth-football-leaders-respond-to-troubling-scenes-from-friday-night-tykes"> </a><a href="http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/01/youth-football-leaders-respond-to-troubling-scenes-from-friday-night-tykes">embarrassingly violent (if somewhat popular!) reality TV show</a>, and<a href="http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-tackle-football-poll-20160720-snap-story.html"> growing public sentiment</a><u> </u>that children shouldn't be hitting each other in the head, youth football has drawn the attention of lawmakers. Members of<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/youth-football-concussions-tom-udall_us_56b4a9d4e4b01d80b245dddf"> </a><a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/youth-football-concussions-tom-udall_us_56b4a9d4e4b01d80b245dddf">Congress have proposed federal equipment oversight</a> by the Consumer Products Safety Commission and Federal Trade Commission, while every state and the District of Columbia has passed youth sports concussion legislation that typically requires (a) basic concussion-recognition training for coaches and (b) that athletes suspected of suffering concussions be removed from play and not returned without medical clearance.<br /><br />Nevertheless, Archie says, more can and should be done.<br /><br />"California<a href="http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-jerry-brown-smoking-bills-20160504-story.html"> </a><a href="http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-jerry-brown-smoking-bills-20160504-story.html">just moved [the legal age to purchase] cigarettes up to age 21</a>," she says. "But you can be five years old, weight 45 pounds, get out of your car seat—a car seat that has to meet certain requirements by law—and go do mini car crashes in football with a phony helmet that isn't made for children. Really?"<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="480px" data-original-width="720px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/09/02/a-new-pop-warner-lawsuit-raises-hard-questions-about-the-future-of-youth-tackle-football-body-image-1472846697.jpg?output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Pop Warner football. Photo by DJ Crazy Gabe/Flickr</div><br />Three years ago, Pop Warner became the first youth football organization to limit contact in practice, to a maximum of one-third of practice time. It also forbids full-speed, head-on blocking and tackling drills in which players line up more than three yards apart, and requires any player who suffers a potential head injury to be examined by a medical professional trained in concussions before returning to play.<br /><br />Is that enough? The lawsuit filed by Archie and Cornell asks for a judicial order imposing additional measures: warning labels on all helmets disclosing the risk of exposure to CTE and other neurological damage and disease, and the development of an actual helmet safety standard by NOCSAE specifically for minors. Taken together, the new requirements would essentially force players, parents, and the youth football industry to further acknowledge two disquieting things: that the sport can be harmful to the brain the way boxing is harmful to the brain, even for its youngest participants, and that those same participants are uniquely at risk.<br /><br />The last part is key, both to the Pop Warner case and to the bigger picture. Unlike, say, the class action concussion lawsuit brought by former NFL players against the league, Archie and Cornell's suit doesn't deal with the responsibilities of employers to grown men being paid to do a dangerous job. It deals with children. And society treats children differently. <br /><br />Children can't smoke. Can't buy beer. Can't join the military. Can't even obtain a driver's license until they are age 16 or older in most states. All of these activities are deemed too risky for minors not only because they are potentially harmful, but also because we don't trust children to make sound, informed decisions about their own well-being. As the suit states, California law requires adults to exercise a greater degree of care when it comes to child safety, because children lack the <i>capacity</i> to "appreciate risks and avoid danger." <br /><br />Back to youth football. The adults running organizations like USA Football and NOCSAE have that capacity. Are they exercising it in a reasonable, responsible manner? Are they focused on protecting children, or protecting a game? What happens if they can't do both—if there is no acceptable level of football-induced brain damage risk for minors—and society has to choose? The new Pop Warner suit has the potential to clarify those questions, but ultimately it won't be able to answer them. That's up to us, and how we feel about the difference between Archie's two helmets.<br /><br />"I can remember in the 1970s, you would see kids piled in the back of a pickup truck, speeding down the highway," she says. "You would never see that today. We know better. But in youth sports, we are still driving 70 miles per hour with the kids in the back of the truck. We need to fix that. America loves sports, but we need to even the playing field and love kids just as much."Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-21249640340465758982016-08-25T13:10:00.001-04:002016-08-25T13:13:29.649-04:00NCAA Cinéma Vérité<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-c5mCJKWFlkM/V78l59eT2WI/AAAAAAAADko/NSEASxDLtZkA3PHvSrNY3EH32iXbMNOlACLcB/s1600/A1%2B10.58.44%2BAM.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-c5mCJKWFlkM/V78l59eT2WI/AAAAAAAADko/NSEASxDLtZkA3PHvSrNY3EH32iXbMNOlACLcB/s1600/A1%2B10.58.44%2BAM.jpg" /></a></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>Former USC football player Bob DeMars sheds light on the dark side of college sports in a new documentary.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | August 2016</attribution></div><br /><b><span class="drop-cap">R</span>eleasing Friday on Amazon, iTunes, and other digital download services,</b> the documentary <a href="http://www.thebusinessofamateurs.com/"><i>The Business of Amateurs</i></a> takes a critical look at big-time college sports, concluding that the National Collegiate Athletic Association and its member schools place money and their own interests above the rights and well-being of campus athletes.<br /><br />VICE Sports recently spoke to director Bob DeMars, a former University of Southern California football player, about his experiences as an athlete, the ongoing debate over pay-for-play, brain trauma in football, criticizing college sports while loving them, and other issues covered in the film.<br /><br />This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length.<br /><b><br /></b><b>VICE Sports: In your film, you diagnose two major ills in college sports: the financial exploitation of athletes, and a parallel failure to protect their physical health. You're also a former USC football player. When you were a college athlete, how did you perceive and understand—or not perceive and understand—those same ills?</b><br /><br /> Bob DeMars: I was pretty naive to those issues as problems. When you're playing, you are carrying everyone's dreams with you—your friends, family, everyone from your hometown is watching you. You go from being the best player wherever you came from to a team where everyone was that guy. There's an awful lot of competition, and you're just thinking about trying to not piss off the coaches.<br /><br />When you're hurt, you feel like a burden to the team. There's a shameful quality to it. Your brothers are out there fighting and battling. You feel guilty.<br /><br />I did feel the squeeze, financially. I would take toilet paper rolls out of the athletic department building to save money. You don't have any money to do anything. But you kind of accept that. You just assume that's the way it's supposed to be. I once went and bought Nike flip-flops because I knew the school had a deal with Nike, and I was worried I might get in trouble if I bought Reebok. [<i>Laughs.</i>]<br /><br />You don't think about the amount of money your coaches are making. John Robinson was my coach when I got to USC. He was very much a father figure. Open-door policy, come talk anytime you want. It felt like a family. One time, John called me in and said, "Bobby, you look thin there." He gave me a $20 handshake. "Go get yourself something to eat." Then he pulled me closer and said, "And bring me back two chicken sandwiches." The chicken sandwiches ended up costing twenty bucks. So I didn't get anything! But that was funny at the time.<br /><br /><img class="vmp-image" src="http://sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/25/former-usc-football-player-bob-demars-talks-pay-for-play-brain-trauma-athletes-rights-and-his-new-college-sports-documentary-the-business-of-amateurs-body-image-1472136845.jpg" data-original-height="437" data-original-width="854" /><br /><br /><div class="photo-credit">Bob DeMars (center) with former USC football coach John Robinson. YouTube</div><b><br /></b><b>What happened to change your understanding, and how and when did you decide that you wanted to make a documentary tackling these issues?</b><br /><br />It was shortly after I finished playing. I realized some of my injuries were still lingering. Back pain, knee pain, shoulder pain, neck pain. All from different times in Paul Hackett era, when I was basically expendable.<br /><br />When Hackett replaced Robinson [as USC head coach], I had to schedule an appointment just to meet with him. When I finally get in his office, he said, "So, I hear you're transferring." I had never said a word or thought about transferring. It turned out that he did that to about eight other guys—he was trying to get us out and bring in his own recruits. This was the end of my freshman year, and he told me I would never play for him. I had turned down Stanford and Harvard to go to USC for their film school. It really bothered me that he was assuming I was only there to play football.<br /><br />So during the time he coached, I probably played about ten years of football, almost all of it in practice. We would have three-a-days back then. We'd practice 24 days straight. There were days we'd only have five or six defensive linemen, and I was one of the only guys who knew all the positions on the D line. So I'd sometimes go 50-60 plays in a row in scrimmages. And I played through injuries that most starters would have sat out and allowed to heal. All because I was trying to prove Paul Hackett wrong.<br /><br />My position coach, Ed Orgeron,<a href="http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2013/06/10/ex-usc-football-player-how-my-coach-called-me-a-m-r-for-going-to-class/"> </a><a href="http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2013/06/10/ex-usc-football-player-how-my-coach-called-me-a-m-r-for-going-to-class/">didn't like me.</a> He thought I was there to go to school. They used to check on players going to class. Now, I would sometimes miss class to try to find time to sleep if I knew I could get an A in that class. Football plus school is very demanding, and something had to give at some point. But they never checked on me, because they assumed I was going. So when Orgeron would read the list of guys who had missed classes, he would give me the stink-eye for <i>not</i> being on it.<br /><br /> <b>Why did you call your film <i data-redactor-tag="i">The Business of Amateurs</i>? That sounds like an oxymoron.</b><br /><br />It is an oxymoron. But it also has a double meaning. Amateurism is about not being paid. But the amateur athlete is the product, and everybody in the system is paid: the coaches, administrators, the marketing department. The title has a second meaning in that the "of" is meant to be possessive. It really is <i>our</i> business, as athletes. So it's a call to action. I think change has to start with the players. Unfortunately, by the time players are enlightened, they are out of the college sports system.<br /><br />[<i>Laughs</i>] I was a little worried that people would search for the film and think it was about cam girls or something.<br /><br /> <b>Are college athletes—at least in the major revenue sports—being exploited by their schools and by the NCAA?</b><br /><br />The NCAA says it was founded for two reasons: protect athlete health, and protect athletes from commercial exploitation. But when it comes the second one, what they really mean to prevent others from exploiting the athletic talent that <i>they</i> are commercially exploiting.<br /><br />When I was playing, I was hyper-aware that<a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2002/aug/20/sports/sp-oregon20"> </a><a href="http://articles.latimes.com/2002/aug/20/sports/sp-oregon20">Oregon put quarterback Joey Harrington on a billboard in Times Square</a>. Heck, you put a dog on a billboard, and the owner of the dog gets paid.<br /><br /> <b>Many people push back against the idea of exploitation, arguing that athletes should instead be grateful because they are receiving a free education. Free food. Free coaching. Free perks. Free medical care. And so on. When you're a big-time college athlete, is anything free?</b><br /><br />No. You're getting paid. That's the scholarship. Sometimes, like if you're flying to South Bend to play Notre Dame, you are putting in 80 hours a week of work. If you break down the scholarship at many schools, athletes are actually making less than minimum wage.<br /><br />There is a misperceived sense that college athletes are entitled and privileged. People think it's amazing to run out of the tunnel on game day. It is amazing! But it happens three to four dozen times while you're at school. It's fleeting, a small part of the picture. The reality is you go there to work. And having to balance that amount of work with school is really difficult.<br /><br /><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="480" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/9SGtoOFoEuM" style="width: 853px;" width="853"><br /></iframe><br /><b><br /></b><b>Speaking of school, the NCAA also argues that amateurism is necessary because allowing college athletes to be compensated beyond a scholarship would compromise their educations. What do you think of that?</b><br /><br />Well, there are a lot people who go to night school while working full-time jobs. [<i>Laughs.</i>]<br /><br />America is a capitalistic society. But somehow, there is this fairy tale—one the NCAA has done a very good job of making people believe—that college sports are all about the glory. Guys who just love to play.<br /><br />Of course, like I said, these guys <i>are</i> paid. They're just paid in the form of the scholarship. Are they worth more than that? Given all the money in the system and how everyone else gets paid, of course they are. But people think a grown man—usually at least 18 years of age, we're not talking about child actors—they think for some reason he shouldn't get his value.<br /><br />In reality, I think race is a factor in this. You look at a lot of these athletes, they are African-American. And it's assumed these black athletes somehow are just lucky to be at the school. That they are not as intelligent. When the fact is they often don't have the have the same opportunities academically, that they come from disadvantaged backgrounds, that they are being pushed through the high school system and being used as bargaining chips because of their athletic ability.<br /><br /> <b>The film is full of powerful individual stories about former college athletes, including that of Ed O'Bannon, the former UCLA basketball player who sued the NCAA in a high-profile federal antitrust case over the use of college athletes' names, images, and likenesses. The most powerful story, however, belongs to a former USC football player named Scott Ross, who played along Junior Seau, was later diagnosed with a form of dementia connected to repetitive head trauma, and</b><a href="http://www.dailynews.com/health/20150815/football-killed-ex-usc-lb-scott-ross-his-family-wants-nfl-to-do-more-about-concussions"><b> </b></a><a href="http://www.dailynews.com/health/20150815/football-killed-ex-usc-lb-scott-ross-his-family-wants-nfl-to-do-more-about-concussions"><b>struggled with depression, anxiety, and alcoholism before dying in 2014 at age 45.</b></a><b> How does his story tie into the bigger picture of college sports?</b><br /><br />It all started with Scott Ross. I knew about him as a player, even though I had never met him in person. His pictures lined the USC defensive meeting rooms. He was a legend for being a wrecking ball of a linebacker.<br /><br />So at one point, my roommate says, "Hey, can my buddy crash on the couch for a while?" It turned out to be Scott. He had just lost his job, and been diagnosed with dementia at age 39. He was a shell. His life was spiraling out of control. He ended up staying with us for seven months, and I got to know him pretty well.<br /><br />I thought, "Wow, look at who he was and where he is now." I had never thought about the long-term repercussions of football before. Not in terms of brain damage. When we went to interview him, it changed the whole film.<br /><br />Scott would be a jumble of emotions when you'd talk to him, very erratic, all over the place. But when we interviewed him in Texas, that day, it was like God gave him his brain back. He was three hours late—but for the next five hours, he was crisp. Everything he said made sense. When we dropped him off at his hotel at the end, he could barely walk. It was like he was drunk, he was so drained from holding himself together mentally for those five hours.<br /><br />One year to that day, he passed away. His parents are great people, and his family has endured so much. Not just from losing Scott, but everything they endured up to that point. Until they saw it, they didn't think that our film was real—Scott would talk about a lot of things, and you didn't know what to believe.<br /><br />I hear fans say all the time, "You signed up for this." I don't think any of us signed up for what happened to Scott.<br /><br /><img class="vmp-image" src="http://sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/25/former-usc-football-player-bob-demars-talks-pay-for-play-brain-trauma-athletes-rights-and-his-new-college-sports-documentary-the-business-of-amateurs-body-image-1472136936.jpg" data-original-height="433" data-original-width="853" /><br /><br /><div class="photo-credit">Former USC football player Scott Ross. YouTube</div><b><br /></b><b>Given all of the hits to the head you took as a football player, do you worry about your own long-term mental health?</b><br /><br />Six months before I started raising money for the film, I was diagnosed with panic disorder. It very well could be related to playing football, to all the subconcussive blows.<br /><br />Panic disorder is a malfunction of the brain. A very unpleasant sensation. The first time it happened to me, I didn't know what was happening. I thought I had been slipped a drug. I was in a pitch meeting—a boring meeting that was going nowhere. All of the sudden, the back of my head got really warm. The room got long. It's hard to describe—it's as if you lose the ability to control how your thoughts work.<br /><br />I just wanted to run out of the room. I knew that would look crazy, so I just rode it out. After about 15 minutes, it passed. I was just drenched in sweat. Breathing heavily. Now, there's comfort in being educated on what it is. But when you're in the moment, it's very irrational and hard to mentally push through.<br /><br />So I'm concerned about the future. I hope my condition isn't the tip of a bigger iceberg, turning into some other form of anxiety or depression. I've chosen to donate by brain to<a href="http://concussionfoundation.org/"> the Concussion Legacy Foundation.</a> Every year, they do a benchmark survey of me. We talk about memory, am I using alcohol or drugs, things like that. I don't know the results, but it definitely makes me aware. Is my speech different? My memory? It's not like Scott Ross woke up one day and his life was different. It was a slow change. I would get calls from Scott at 2 AM. He would say, "If the handle on this bottle was a trigger, I would pull it." My wife would got to work at 5:30 AM, and I would still be on the phone.<br /><br />Coming forward with my condition was one of the hardest decisions that I've made. Athletes are prideful by nature, and to admit you have a deficiency in an area that most people assume is your identity is very hard. But I know there are other guys out there suffering, and if I can be vocal, maybe they will realize they're not alone. I've had several screenings of the film across the country, and afterwards, I've had about a dozen former teammates come up to me, shake my hand, and whisper, "I have what you have."<br /><br /> <b>The Rio Games just concluded. Once upon a time, the Olympics required participating athletes to be amateurs—but by the 1990s, that went out the window. Today, athletes aren't paid by the Games to participate, but they are largely free to endorse products, have sponsors, and accept compensation from third parties (although certain IOC regulations apply). Many people, </b><a href="http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/07/the-olympics-show-why-college-sports-should-give-up-on-amateurism/260275/"><b>myself included,</b></a><b> have asked why the NCAA doesn't adopt this model—don't pay athletes salaries, but otherwise let them earn what they can. What do you think of that idea?</b><br /><br />The first time we played at Florida State when I was at USC, I remember being in the locker room about three hours before the game. This is what happens during that time: guys take turn going to bathroom and reading the program. That's it! So the program at Florida State, I'm not even joking, there was like 30 [then-Seminoles coach] Bobby Bowden ads. Like, here's Bobby Bowden in front of the lube shop. Come get your car checked out!<br /><br />I'm sure he's a great guy. But nobody had a problem with that. So to me, when people talk about paying athletes, we don't even need to come up with a system. Just let them make money off their own likeness. The NCAA won't allow that, because they're protecting their brand—a perceived sense of purity that really doesn't exist. If college sports were pure, the coaches and administrators would be doing this as volunteers.<br /><br />That gets to the Olympics. Originally when they were moving away from amateurism, the [International Olympics Committee] was worried that they would tarnish their brand, too. But all getting rid of amateurism did was make the Olympics bigger and better. Nobody cared that the athletes were in commercials. Nobody has a problem with people getting their value in any walk of life.<br /><br />So go back to college. The reality is that most of these athletes have their peak value as college athletes, and it's short-lived. Why can't they capitalize on that? Nobody can give me a good explanation.<br /><br /> <b>Your film covers the O'Bannon lawsuit. The NCAA lost and was found to be in violation of antitrust law. Yet panel of appeals judges ruled that it can continue to prohibit athletes accepting any compensation beyond athletic scholarships and a relatively small cost-of-school-attendance stipend. Meanwhile,</b><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/nlrb-to-northwestern-football-union"><b> the national office of the National Labor Relations Board refused to even consider a case that would have allowed Northwestern University football players to unionize.</b></a><b> Why do you think our legal system is reluctant to intervene in college sports?</b><br /><br />You ever play Jenga? After a while, the pile of blocks gets so high that nobody messes with the pieces on the bottom. That's the foundation of the game. I think everybody is afraid if they move the wrong piece, the college sports system will collapse. In the Northwestern case, they ruled in favor of the players, and then decided not to assert jurisdiction. They didn't want to be the catalyst of a change. Same thing with O'Bannon. They ruled for the players, and then put on a payment cap. Why not cap the coaches and athletic directors?<br /><br />Once again, I think it comes down to that fairy tale. The idea that somehow things will be ruined. But they show highlights during March Madness with the Coca-Cola logo. It's already commercialized, it's just that the players aren't free to reap the benefits. And like I said before, I think race is a factor. A certain part of America looks at the athletes and says, "Oh, they will just blow [any money] on rims."<br /><br />I could have made a nine-part series instead of a single movie. About the medical issues, about the money, about education. They're all connected. It really is Jenga. And have you ever seen someone do a power move and take out a bottom block quickly and everything is still standing? I think that could happen. I just don't think anyone has the guts to do that yet.<br /><br /> <b>Some people—like myself—have said the only thing that will really change college sports is a high-profile athlete strike. Like shutting down the Final Four, or college football's national championship game. Is that the kind of Jenga power move you're talking about?</b><br /><br />When you're in the moment and put in all that hard work and have the opportunity to win a championship, for a guy to give that up for the sake of maybe—really, being blackballed or ostracized, having fans saying you're ungrateful, how dare you take this away from us—that's hard. You'll catch a ton of heat for doing that. But you know what? They'd make history. Can you tell me who won the 2003 March Madness tournament? I can't. But I will remember [Former Northwestern quarterback and unionization leader] Kain Colter for what he did.<br /><br />The biggest obstacle is that by the time guys are enlightened and educated—not just worrying about your roster spot, holding on to your friends and families' dreams, grinding and thinking about the moment—you're already done with college.<br /><br />I also think football might be harder. It's just so many guys to organize. But from what I understand, basketball players once got close to boycotting March Madness. In that sport, all it would take is ten guys to sit out and change everything.<br /><br /><img class="vmp-image" src="http://sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/25/former-usc-football-player-bob-demars-talks-pay-for-play-brain-trauma-athletes-rights-and-his-new-college-sports-documentary-the-business-of-amateurs-body-image-1472137055.jpg" data-original-height="437" data-original-width="851" /><br /><br /><div class="photo-credit">Does the NCAA act in the best interest of college athletes, or of its own bottom line? YouTube</div><b><br /></b><b>You mentioned Kain Colter. During the Northwestern football unionization effort, it was reported that many alumni and former players were furious with the athletes attempting to form a union. Meanwhile, </b><a href="http://deadspin.com/kain-colters-union-battle-cost-him-more-than-he-ever-ex-1724831203"><b>Colter was ostracized.</b></a><b> What do current athletes risk if they speak up about these issues? What about former athletes like yourself?</b><br /><br />They risk becoming a pariah in some cases. Kain got a lot of heat. When you're playing, all you know is fighting for playing time. You're committed to your sport, fighting for respect. That's all you do every day when you're not doing schoolwork. To put that at risk is difficult. There's the fear of losing those long-term connection, too. Like at USC, there's the idea that you're a Trojan for life. If you're a part of that Trojan network, they take care of their own. It's very true, and a great thing about the school.<br /><br />That was one of the things I was scared of making the film. I was worried I'd be misperceived as turning heel on my own school. <a href="http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2013/06/10/ex-usc-football-player-how-my-coach-called-me-a-m-r-for-going-to-class/">When I spoke out about Ed Orgeron to </a><a href="http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2013/06/10/ex-usc-football-player-how-my-coach-called-me-a-m-r-for-going-to-class/"><i>Time</i></a><a href="http://keepingscore.blogs.time.com/2013/06/10/ex-usc-football-player-how-my-coach-called-me-a-m-r-for-going-to-class/"> magazine</a>, I was lit up. People pulled money from the Kickstarter campaign for the film. People were spending five bucks to send me a Facebook message telling me I'm that I was wrong.<br /><br />It's the sports culture. It's like breaking the athlete code. They thought I was trying to hurt the school. But it's actually the opposite.<br /><br /> <b>So have you shown this film to current college athletes? If so, what did they think of it?</b><br /><br />We went to Oregon State. We were told the football team would be there. The associate athletic director showed up to the screening, but the football team didn't. All of the sudden, there was a required event they had to go to. [<i>Laughs</i>] On a Sunday night!<br /><br />We also had a screening at Drexel. The athletic director was there, and some of the school's athletes. A lot of them came up and said, "Great job. It really hit home. Thank you for doing it." The athletic director said he was enlightened by the film. He wanted to do more for his athletes.<br /><br /> <b>What about USC?</b><br /><br />They haven't seen the film. I called them and asked to set up a screening. They said they didn't have a big enough venue. They're 20 feet from the cinema school! [<i>Laughs</i>] When it comes to the academia side of the university, everybody supports what I'm doing. It's easier for them, because they're not on the sports payroll.<br /><br />I don't think people in sports necessarily know what the film is about. They think we are trying to get rid of sports, or shame people for the sake of shaming. But it's just trying to shine a spotlight so we don't have these injustices in the future. When I'm telling Scott Ross' story, I'm not saying, "Look at what USC did to him." USC didn't kill Scott Ross. It's a cautionary tale of what went wrong, and now we have to change to make sure it doesn't happen again.<br /><br />We're now aware of concussions and diseases like CTE [chronic traumatic encephalopathy]. There are some very simple solutions for making football athletes safer. Like minimizing contact practices. Like having independent medical staff that doesn't have the coach's interest in mind. But not one conference but the Ivy League has taken that step. To me, right now, it's unforgivable. Twenty years from now, we will have more Scott Rosses, and you won't be able to look back and say you didn't know.<br /><br />This is a film made out of love. I love my school. I think that's hard for fans to reconcile—they don't want to see how their sausage is made. It was probably the hardest thing for me to reconcile, too. How do I explore the darker side of college athletics, but also show that I'm still as proud to be a Trojan as anyone who as graduated from USC?<br /><br />I have to give USC credit: I've had discussions with the administrators there, trying to push forward some of the issues I present in the film, like a health plan that would cover athletes for their college sports injuries after they leave school. They haven't ignored me. But they haven't endorsed the film. They're playing it safe right now. Which is, I think, what the NLRB did with Northwestern, and what everyone is doing. But as the gap between the money being made and the rights college athletes don't have gets bigger and bigger, eventually that bubble will pop.Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-70102889725298676062016-08-20T15:34:00.002-04:002016-08-23T16:02:13.781-04:00Golden Handcuffs<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DREpxhPDLhs/V7iv7UtnEkI/AAAAAAAADhk/VUNcm1taBuMUd-11ydBg2Pqmy-WU_sYjwCLcB/s1600/the-ncaa-lets-college-olympians-collect-cash-for-gold-because-amateurism-is-a-self-serving-lie-1471535920.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-DREpxhPDLhs/V7iv7UtnEkI/AAAAAAAADhk/VUNcm1taBuMUd-11ydBg2Pqmy-WU_sYjwCLcB/s1600/the-ncaa-lets-college-olympians-collect-cash-for-gold-because-amateurism-is-a-self-serving-lie-1471535920.jpg" /></a></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>The NCAA lets college Olympians collect cash for gold, because amateurism is a self-serving lie.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | August 2016</attribution></div><br><br /><b><span class="drop-cap">P</span>ity Christian McCaffrey.</b> He plays the wrong sport. Sure, the Stanford University running back is one of college football's biggest returning stars—a preseason Heisman Trophy favorite and a tentpole performer in a multibillion-dollar entertainment industry. Thanks to the National Collegiate Athletic Association's amateurism rules, however, he won't be able to realize more than a fraction of his economic value this fall. No performance bonuses from his athletic department. No gifts from wealthy boosters. Not even <a href="http://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/report-oklahoma-self-reports-excessive-pasta-violation/">a gratis plate of pasta.</a> No, McCaffrey can't accept a penny beyond his athletic scholarship and a small cost-of-attendance stipend, because anything more would <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/01/sports/obannon-ncaa-case-court-of-appeals-ruling.html?_r=0">destroy his incentive to read a textbook</a>, or <a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/54644180/">trigger a mass-extinction event within women's rowing</a>, or <a href="http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2013/06/ed_obannon_plaintiff_lawyers_a.html">force Big Ten schools to abandon ultra-lucrative major campus sports altogether,</a> or maybe just force association president Mark Emmert to make $1.8 million a year <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2016/06/23/ncaa-tax-return-mark-emmert-jim-isch/86287914/">instead of $1.9 million</a>. <a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/the-college-sportspocalypse-that-isnt">Or something.</a><br /><br />Anyway, my point is that he should have spent more time in a pool.<br /><br />Just ask Katie Ledecky. Like McCaffrey, the 19-year-old swimmer is at top of her sport, having set two world records en route to winning five Olympic medals—four gold, one silver—at the Rio Games. And like McCaffrey, she'll be competing for Stanford later this year. But unlike her football-playing peer, Ledecky will be able to cash in on her athletic ability<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/rio-2016/2016/08/02/paying-ncaa-college-athletes-at-rio-olympics-kyle-snyder-katie-ledecky/87709714/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/rio-2016/2016/08/02/paying-ncaa-college-athletes-at-rio-olympics-kyle-snyder-katie-ledecky/87709714/">without running afoul</a> of the same Javert-ian organization that<a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/a-division-iii-ncaa-scandal-shows-even-small-schools-will-pay-to-win"> </a><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/a-division-iii-ncaa-scandal-shows-even-small-schools-will-pay-to-win">recently rapped Division III Baruch College for giving too much financial aid to its women's basketball players</a>.<br /><div class="read-more"><br /></div>How is this possible? Simple. For decades, the NCAA and its member schools have been collecting rentier profits, ducking antitrust laws, and squashing the fundamental economic rights of college athletes by invoking the noble, immutable principle of amateurism: <i>thou shalt not be paid to play sports if you're wearing the <del data-redactor-tag="del">billboard</del> uniform that Under Armor is paying us to dress you in</i>. For just as long, that same noble, immutable principle has been practically defined as whatever the NCAA says it is.<br /><br />Once upon a time,<a href="http://deadspin.com/the-ncaa-has-always-paid-players-now-its-just-harder-t-1727419062"> </a><a href="http://deadspin.com/the-ncaa-has-always-paid-players-now-its-just-harder-t-1727419062">athletic scholarships counted as pay.</a> Then they didn't.<a href="http://articles.dailypress.com/1990-04-04/sports/9004040002_1_athletes-stipend-virginia-tech"> </a><a href="http://articles.dailypress.com/1990-04-04/sports/9004040002_1_athletes-stipend-virginia-tech">Laundry money </a><a href="http://articles.dailypress.com/1990-04-04/sports/9004040002_1_athletes-stipend-virginia-tech"><i>didn't</i></a><a href="http://articles.dailypress.com/1990-04-04/sports/9004040002_1_athletes-stipend-virginia-tech"> count as pay</a>. Then it did. The association was deeply, existentially opposed to both cost-of-living stipends and<a href="http://www.athleticscholarships.net/2012/10/04/how-ncaa-banned-cream-cheese.htm"> </a><a href="http://www.athleticscholarships.net/2012/10/04/how-ncaa-banned-cream-cheese.htm">complimentary bagel topping</a>s—that is, until bad press and expensive lawsuits convinced NCAA president Mark Emmert and company that, actually, cream cheese should be spread liberally, that gas and pizza money won't break the bank of an industry that can afford<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/sec/2016/06/21/alabama-strength-coach-scott-cochran-salary-525000-per-year/86178328/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/sec/2016/06/21/alabama-strength-coach-scott-cochran-salary-525000-per-year/86178328/">to pay football strength coaches $525,000 per year</a>, and that we have always been at war with East Asia. Point is, amateurism is a word fart expelled after wolfing down a nothingburger, a Potemkin concept so empty that even the International Olympic Committee—a group of be-blazered blowhards blithely self-important enough to fancy their quadrennial reality show cum international municipal looting an honest-to-goodness <i>movement</i>—has no use for it.<br /><br />Which brings us back to the Games. For the past 15 years,<a href="http://sports.yahoo.com/news/rio-mystery-solved-can-ncaa-athletes-keep-their-olympic-medal-bonuses-032912550.html"> </a><a href="http://sports.yahoo.com/news/rio-mystery-solved-can-ncaa-athletes-keep-their-olympic-medal-bonuses-032912550.html">the NCAA has allowed</a> incoming and current college athletes to keep any bonuses they receive from the United States Olympic Committee's "Operation Gold" program, which pays cash prizes for medals: $25,00 for gold; $15,000 for silver; and $10,000 for bronze. As <i>USA Today's</i> <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/rio-2016/2016/08/02/paying-ncaa-college-athletes-at-rio-olympics-kyle-snyder-katie-ledecky/87709714/">Steve Berkowitz reports</a>, world-class college athletes in Olympic sports also are permitted to receive cash and benefits worth hundreds to hundreds of thousands of dollars, everything from monthly stipends to free electronics.<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1440px" data-original-width="2164px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/18/the-ncaa-lets-college-olympians-collect-cash-for-gold-because-amateurism-is-a-self-serving-lie-body-image-1471536063.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Too bad that's not a gold medal, but enjoy the Rose Bowl gift bag! Photo by Robert Hanashiro-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />In Ledecky's case, this means a $115,000 payday at the Rio Games. She's not alone. Stanford swimmer Simone Manuel captured two golds and two silvers, worth a cool $80,000. University of Georgia swimmer Gunnar Bentz and University of West Virginia rifle shooter Ginny Thrasher each won golds, worth $25,000 apiece. Then there's University of Texas swimmer Joseph Schooling. Competing for Singapore, he beat out Michael Phelps for a 100-meter butterfly gold medal—a victory that netted him <a href="http://www.sportingnews.com/athletics/news/rio-olympics-2016-joseph-schooling-gold-medal-bonus-singapore/1osohy47yl6gu1nyhvs6a2l1g6">a government bonus of one <i>million</i> Singaporean dollars</a> (about $740,000), which the association will allow him to pocket.<br /><br />Meanwhile, former Georgia running back Todd Gurley once accepted a couple thousand dollars' worth of cash for signing autographs—and was promptly suspended by the NCAA for four games, a punishment that provoked hysterical state lawmakers into criminalizing <br /><del>major American universities acting like drug cartels protecting their turf</del>the egregious, immoral act of <a href="http://collegefootball.ap.org/article/georgia-governor-signs-todd-gurley-bill-law">giving college athletes money.</a><br />If this all seems like an unfair, if not downright capricious, way to treat campus athletes whose sports (<i>cough football cough Dream Team/WNBA-era basketball</i>) aren't represented at the Olympics, that's because it is. And if it all seems like hypocritical bullshit? Welcome to college sports. The association's pay-for-play Olympics carve-outs aren't just head-scratchingly arbitrary; they're a window into just how flimsy amateurism's ethical and logical underpinnings really are.<br /><br />College athletes must be amateurs,<a href="http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/sports/index.ssf/2014/06/ncaa_president_mark_emmert_pay.html"> </a><a href="http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/sports/index.ssf/2014/06/ncaa_president_mark_emmert_pay.html">Emmert has claimed</a>, because fans want to believe that said athletes are competing for pride, school, and the love of sport—and not filthy, debased lucre. Fine, but if that's the case, then why is it OK to let them collect the USOC's Cash-For-Gold? Isn't that literally being paid to win, less fight, fight, fight for Ol' State U than straight-up prizefighting? In federal court, the NCAA currently is arguing that athlete compensation should only be permissible if tethered to education. The Rio Games have been many things—August television doldrums relief; an opportunity for Ryan Lochte to make bad decisions in another country;<a href="http://www.cbssports.com/olympics/news/watch-horse-dances-to-smooth-at-rio-olympics-dressage-competition/"> </a><a href="http://www.cbssports.com/olympics/news/watch-horse-dances-to-smooth-at-rio-olympics-dressage-competition/">the truest-ever use of Santana and Rob Thomas' "Smooth"</a>—but an advanced calculus class ain't one of them.<br /><br />In its running battle to keep big-time college football and men's basketball players from keeping a fair portion of the billions of dollars they earn for their schools, the NCAA has decreed that campus athletes can't accept<a href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview"> </a><a href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview">money from boosters</a> or<a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2016/05/breana_dodd_can_get_paid_to_endorse_candy_her_boyfriend_college_football.html"> </a><a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2016/05/breana_dodd_can_get_paid_to_endorse_candy_her_boyfriend_college_football.html">commercial sponsors.</a> That would be wrong. Only guess where the USOC gets its money—the same money it funnels to Olympic medalists. You guessed it: corporate sponsors and private donations (i.e., boosters).<br /><br />In other words, the NCAA is fine with amateur athletes being paid, so long as that cash is first laundered alongside the American flag.<br /><br />All that said, it's hard to argue that the association's Olympic pay-for-play exceptions aren't a net positive. After all, some athletes somewhere are at least receiving something closer to their free market value. And that's good—just as it's good when amateur college football players are allowed to keep bowl game swag bags and gifts, because they come from selfless,<a href="http://www.campusrush.com/john-junker-fiesta-bowl-prison-1547731963.html"> </a><a href="http://www.campusrush.com/john-junker-fiesta-bowl-prison-1547731963.html">upstanding college sports executives like John Junker</a>, and not sleazy, exploitative, money-grubbing agents. However, letting Ohio State wrestler Kyle Snyder receive a $1,000 monthly stipend from USA Wrestling doesn't address the root of the problem in campus sports. The real injustice isn't the terms of any particular athlete's deal; rather, it's the terms of the dealing. Pay-for-play—like pay for <i>anything</i>—only happens when you're free to negotiate within a competitive marketplace. That's what the NCAA is fighting against, because that's what all cartels fight against. The debate over amateurism is tangentially about money, and fundamentally about control.<br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1399px" data-original-width="913px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/18/the-ncaa-lets-college-olympians-collect-cash-for-gold-because-amateurism-is-a-self-serving-lie-body-image-1471536181.jpg?output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">First you get the money, then you get the power. Or maybe it's the other way around. Photo by RVR Photos-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Over a decade ago, Olympic skier Jeremy Bloom—a fine high school student and standout athlete—wanted to play football at the University of Colorado while receiving money from the winter sport sponsors that made his moguls career possible. The NCAA nixed it. More recently, Olympic gymnast Jordyn Wieber wanted to compete for the University of California, Los Angeles gymnastics team. Instead, she was forced to participate as a student-manager and, later, as a volunteer assistant coach. Why? Wieber<a href="http://www.si.com/more-sports/2015/04/15/jordyn-wieber-ucla-student-manager-ncaa-olympics"> </a><a href="http://www.si.com/more-sports/2015/04/15/jordyn-wieber-ucla-student-manager-ncaa-olympics">accepted sponsorship and endorsement money in high school,</a> and the NCAA declared her ineligible. After her final race in Rio, Ledecky told reporters that<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/columnist/brennan/2016/08/13/five-medals-rio-katie-ledecky-talks-whats-next/88683606/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/columnist/brennan/2016/08/13/five-medals-rio-katie-ledecky-talks-whats-next/88683606/">she was forsaking commercial opportunities</a>—likely worth millions of dollars—in order to swim for Stanford. "I want to get a really great education and have the opportunities that collegiate swimming brings," she said. "And to do that, I had to remain an amateur." Left unasked: Why should she have to choose? Because the association unilaterally says so?<br /><br />Political scientist Harold Lasswell once defined politics as <em>who gets what, when, how.</em> To the front of that, add <i>who gets to decide. </i>While actress Natalie Portman attended Harvard, she appeared in the <i>Star Wars</i> prequels. Nobody forced her to work for free, or to settle for a small portion of her actual worth, because receiving market compensation would undercut her education. There is no National Collegiate Acting Association. Ledecky and other college athlete Olympians may be luckier than McCaffrey, and a bit better compensated, but ultimately they remain just as subject to the NCAA's whims, and just as deprived of their basic rights as American citizens. Golden handcuffs still bind.Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-85316629369394614522016-08-19T19:39:00.001-04:002016-08-19T19:43:31.582-04:00The Drugs Won<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eJ_WF88W9Rk/V7Hv5ml3g0I/AAAAAAAADYw/eL6BFjjT8QYnBcVK1pOSHRGWm4PUUPUBACLcB/s1600/syringefinal.jpg" imageanchor="1"><img border="0" src="https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-eJ_WF88W9Rk/V7Hv5ml3g0I/AAAAAAAADYw/eL6BFjjT8QYnBcVK1pOSHRGWm4PUUPUBACLcB/s1600/syringefinal.jpg" /></a></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>The case for ending the sports war on doping</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | August 2016</attribution></div><br /><b><span class="drop-cap">D</span>oug Logan had seen enough. </b>For years, he had served on the front line of the sports war on performance-enhancing drugs, first as the commissioner of Major League Soccer, and later as the chief executive officer of USA Track and Field. For years, he believed in the fight.<br /><br />Logan was a professional mentee of Peter Ueberroth—the man who organized the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics and helped fund the country's first anti-doping laboratory—and a lifelong runner himself. Two days after he took the top job at USATF, in the summer of 2008, news broke that former Olympian Marion Jones had asked President George W. Bush to commute her prison sentence for lying to federal investigators about her PED use. Logan responded with <a href="http://www.usatf.org/news/view.aspx?DUID=USATF_2008_07_22_06_15_21" target="_blank">a harsh open letter</a> to the White House, calling Jones a liar, a cheat, and a fraud. In 2010, when sprinter LaShawn Merritt blamed a failed doping test on his use of a sexual enhancement supplement purchased at a 7-11 store—an explanation an arbitrator later found credible—Logan nevertheless blasted him publicly, stating <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2010/SPORT/04/22/athletics.merritt.drugs.ban/" target="_blank">he was "disgusted</a>" and that Merritt had brought "shame" to himself and his teammates.<br /><br />Logan believed it was his job to protect his sport. Back when he established MLS's first drug-testing program, he insisted that front-office executives be tested, too, just like players, and that <i>his</i> urine be the first sample collected in a cup. "I took my responsibility seriously," says Logan, now 73 and living in Sarasota, Florida. "I kind of followed the tribe on this for a long period of time."<br /><br />During that same span, however, Logan didn't witness any real progress. He would walk the infield at track meets, observe the superhuman physiques all around him—men and women—and know they were crafted with chemical help. He would overhear coaches talking about using asthma inhalers with their athletes, none of whom were actually sick. For all of the strong words and tamper-proof sample bottles, nothing much was changing. Nothing ever had. "My first year in MLS, we had only one positive test," he says. "That was for marijuana. And it was for an off-the-field employee!"<br /><br />This was a war, Logan began to realize, with few victories. In 2010, he was fired by USATF, <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/13/AR2010091305349.html" target="_blank">reportedly in part</a> for his outspoken style (a subsequent wrongful termination suit was settled). The split gave Logan time to think, and by the summer of 2013 he was ready to share. In <a href="http://speedendurance.com/2013/06/13/shin-splints-redux-may-the-best-meds-win/" target="_blank">an online column</a> titled "May the Best Meds Win," he called the sports war on drugs hypocritical and unwinnable. A quagmire. Dismantle the constabulary, he wrote, starting with the World and U.S. Anti-Doping Agencies, WADA and USADA. Put Barry Bonds in the Baseball Hall of Fame. If athletes break criminal laws, then let them face the consequences; otherwise, let them decide what's best for their bodies. Comparing PED prohibition to the Vietnam War, Logan concluded that it was time to declare victory, give up the fight, and bring the troops home.<br /><br />"This is a war we have not won, cannot win, and should not be involved with," he says today.<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1068px" data-original-width="1314px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470013471.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Doug Logan and American sprinter Allyson Felix at the 2010 Penn Relays. Photo by Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />When the Rio Olympics begin on August 5th, thousands of athletes from around the world will march into Maracanã Stadium, smiling and waving national flags. Many will go on to run fast, jump high, and otherwise push the limits of human performance. Some almost certainly will be doping. For decades, the sports world's response to PED use has been the same as Logan's letter to the Oval Office: zero tolerance. Police and punish. No retreat, and certainly no surrender. USADA executive Travis Tygart called Russia's recently revealed state-supported doping program a "<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/25/opinion/come-clean-russia-or-no-rio.html?_r=0" target="_blank">violation of the very essence of sport.</a>" As is the case with the larger war on drugs, Just Say No is the athletic status quo, with the battle against banned substances ranging from testosterone to cold medicine framed as a moral crusade.<br /><br />However, a small group of heretics—academics, mostly, but also people like Logan—have started to challenge that view. The war on doping, they contend, has done far more harm than good: wasting money, retarding medicine, fostering corruption, and trampling on athletes' rights and dignity while failing to protect their health. The ongoing Russian scandal—which features bribes, extortion, and state security agents infiltrating a Moscow anti-doping laboratory to slip doctored urine samples through a secret hole in an office wall, all resulting in at least 111 Russian athletes being banned from Rio—is not, to them, a meaningful victory. Rather, it's a sign of ongoing defeat. Sports keep fighting. Drugs keep winning. Wouldn't it be safer, rational, and arguably more honest to end PED prohibition? To permit, study, and regulate the drug use that already happens regardless of the rules?<br /><br />At the very least, Logan believes, it's time for a rethink.<br /><br />"The importance is to have the conversation," he says. "From the standpoint of the sports industry, the question shouldn't be, 'Did WADA screw up in Russia, and how can we arm them with more tools to make sure a Russia doesn't happen again?' No, the question should be, 'Should we be involved in this thing at all?'"<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1442px" data-original-width="2184px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470013767.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Don Catlin founded the UCLA Olympic Analytical Laboratory, the first anti-doping lab in the United States. Photo by Presse Sports-USA TODAY Sports</div><strong><br /></strong><br /><strong>Don Catlin never intended to become America's top doping detective.</strong> He just wanted some new laboratory equipment. In 1981, Catlin—a University of California, Los Angeles medical school professor and former U.S. Army officer who had cut his scientific teeth researching drug abuse by American soldiers during the Vietnam War—was asked by the International Olympic Committee to run a drug testing program for the 1984 Summer Games in Los Angeles.<br /><br />Catlin said no. Cocaine and heroin? Sure. Addiction was a serious social problem. But doping? Catlin <a href="http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/2007-02-28-catlin_x.htm" target="_blank">had grown up rooting</a> for Ted Williams and the Boston Red Sox. He considered himself a sports fan, but PEDs weren't on his radar. At the time, that wasn't unusual. For most of history, doping has been viewed more as something athletes <i>did</i> than something they shouldn't be doing; only recently has it become a matter of widespread concern.<br /><br />The history of sports doping goes all the way back to the ancient Olympics, where <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-oly-doping-history-day-idUSBRE8700YC20120801" target="_blank">athletes chewed on raw testicles</a> in the hopes of enhancing their performances. In the modern era, 1904 Olympic marathon runner Thomas Hicks <a href="http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-1904-olympic-marathon-may-have-been-the-strangest-ever-14910747/?no-ist" target="_blank">downed a concoction of egg whites and strychnine</a>—a rat poison that also acts as a stimulant in small doses—en route to victory. Tour de France riders during the 1920s relied on the same drug, and also nitroglycerine, the primary ingredient in dynamite. Following World War II, amphetamine use spread from fighter pilots to professional baseball. In the 1950s, American and Soviet weightlifters were gobbling steroids; by the next decade, the same anabolic muscle-building drugs had <a href="http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/news/story?id=3866837" target="_blank">spread to college and professional football</a>.<br /><br />Following the death of a Danish cyclist Knut Jensen at the 1960 Rome Games—he passed out during a race, cracked his skull, and ultimately died of heatstroke, a series of events blamed on amphetamines <a href="http://www.sportsintegrityinitiative.com/the-truth-about-knud-revisiting-an-anti-doping-myth/" target="_blank">he may or may not have been using</a>—sports officials began to view doping as dangerous. Nine years later, <i>Sports Illustrated</i> published an influential three-part cover story titled "<a href="http://www.si.com/vault/issue/43044/1/1" target="_blank">Drugs: A Threat to Sport.</a>" The frame was set. When East German female swimmers fortified by a systematic, state-sponsored drug program crushed their American rivals at the 1976 Montreal Games, the notion that PED use equaled cheating was given a Cold War boost. <i>No wonder those dirty, underhanded Commies beat our girls. </i>By the early 1980s, the sports doping war was beginning to take shape, right alongside the larger War on Drugs. Each was informed by the cultural and political conflicts of the late 1960s, and a burgeoning sense that drug use of all kinds was both symptom and cause of moral decay.<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1600px" data-original-width="1214px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470014458.jpg?output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Sports Illustrated, circa 1969. Image from eBay</div><br /><br />None of that crossed Catlin's mind when the IOC reached out. However, the analytical chemist had a problem—he needed a gas chromatograph and a mass spectrometer, sophisticated machines used to analyze chemical compounds. Together, they would cost about $500,000. "The IOC offered to pay for it," Catlin says. "So I said yes. It was a good deal for me. All I had to do was test the athletes at the Olympics, and I'd get to keep the equipment. I didn't see what all of this would become."<br /><br />Over the next three decades, Catlin oversaw drug testing at the 1996 Atlanta Games and the 2002 Salt Lake City Games. He helped develop tests for an artificial version of the male sex hormone testosterone, the blood-booster erythropoietin (EPO), and tetrahydrogestrinone (THG), otherwise known as "the clear," the performance-enhancer at the heart of the BALCO scandal that involved Jones, Bonds, and a number of other athletes across multiple sports. His UCLA Olympic Analytical Lab became one of the world's top anti-doping facilities, staffed by dozens of scientists and conducting tens of thousands of tests a year for clients including the National Football League, the National Collegiate Athletic Association, minor league baseball, and USADA.<br /><br />Catlin saw the doping battle expand from the Olympics to <a href="http://deadspin.com/5941247/yes-chess-grand-masters-are-still-being-drug-tested-for-doping" target="_blank">international chess</a>, and from a handful of labs to dozens scattered across the globe. By the late 1980s, after congressional hearings led by Joe Biden, America's punitive drug laws were lumping in steroids with narcotics. At the turn of the 21st century, agencies like WADA and USADA were formed to fight the scourge; soon they were <a href="http://www.outsideonline.com/1823621/awful-truth-about-drugs-sports" target="_blank">spending hundreds of thousands of dollars</a> on testing and investigations of athletes. For much of that time, Catlin relished the fight. The work was intellectually challenging; better still, it was making a real difference.<br /><br />Or so Catlin believed. Over time, he began to have second thoughts. A pattern emerged. Scientists like Catlin would discover a drug and develop a test. A few athletes would be caught. The rest would figure out ways to beat the test, or move on to another substance. There were always new compounds, or new ways to mask old ones; there was an entire underground industry of labs and chemists working to evade and confound Catlin's best efforts. Sports organizations talked a good game, but didn't quite put their money where their mouths were: in 2015, WADA's total budget was approximately $30 million—only $8 million more than professional baseball player and repeat PED user Alex Rodriguez's salary in the same year.<br /><br />By the time Catlin retired from his UCLA lab in 2007, his confidence had eroded. "I left with a sense of this isn't working the way I thought it would," says Catlin, 78, who now runs the Los Angeles-based nonprofit Anti-Doping Research. "You had to do testing, but it wasn't going to fix the problem of drugs in sports. In some ways, what I was doing felt futile."<br /><br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1623px" data-original-width="2628px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470014860.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Will the Rio Games be a "nightmare" of doping, as one international swimming coach predicts? Photo by Rob Schumacher-USA TODAY Sports</div><b><br /></b><br /><b>Since the IOC first instituted limited drug testing for amphetamines at the 1968 Mexico City Games</b>, the doping war has been fought with two goals in mind. Reduce and prevent use. Catch and punish users. Is the battle being won? Committed warriors like USADA's Tygart argue that testing acts as an effective deterrent. That it protects athletes who don't dope from having to compete against, and lose to, athletes who do.<br /><br />Others disagree. John Hoberman, a University of Texas professor and sports-doping historian, calls current anti-doping measures "a charade." Former WADA chief Dick Pound has told reporters that he questions "<a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-2384113/Dick-Pound-Doping-widespread-sport.html" target="_blank">everything I see</a>" in sports, from cycling to tennis. BALCO mastermind Victor Conte told VICE Sports that he thinks the number of track and field athletes using PEDs in Rio will be about the same as at the 2004 Athens Games; meanwhile, World Swimming Coaches Association head John Leonard has said that the upcoming Games will be a "<a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/olympics-2016/rio-olympics-set-to-be-the-most-dopedup-swimming-event-in-history/news-story/13c44b16a1790394b6c4ae505448bda4" target="_blank">nightmare of doping,</a>" with <i>more</i> use among athletes in his sport than ever before.<br /><br />Catlin used to enjoy following the Olympics. Not anymore. "I lost my taste," he says. "I saw everybody that doped."<br /><br />Examples of failed deterrence abound. Earlier this year, New York Mets pitcher Jerry Mejia was banned for life by MLB after failing three steroid tests over two years. (<a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/highlight/lawyer-for-jenrry-mejia-will-hold-press-conference-alleging-mob-like-corruption-in-mlb">Mejia's lawyer has accused the league of "mob-like corruption" and intends to sue</a>.) In 2009, Rodriguez admitted to using steroids, apologized, said <a href="http://m.mlb.com/news/article/3811116//" target="_blank">he no longer needed the drugs</a>, endured public scorn, and <a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/mlb/article3578762.html" target="_blank">then told federal agents</a> that he continued to take PEDs between 2010 and 2012. When a federal investigation definitively uncovered cyclist Lance Armstrong's doping, Tygart and others hailed it as major victory, proof that the doping war was working—never mind that almost all of Armstrong's major Tour de France rivals already had been fingered as PED users, and that their exposure didn't stop Armstrong and his teammates from doping.<br /><br />In late July, IOC officials announced that 45 athletes from the London and Beijing Olympics—including 23 medalists from the latter—had failed drug tests after their stored urine and blood samples had been reanalyzed using newer techniques, bringing the total number of retroactive doping busts from both events to 98. That's almost 100 athletes who competed at the Games knowing their samples would be retested in the future <i>and doped anyway.</i><br /><br />And why not? The odds are decidedly in their favor. In 2012, WADA-accredited laboratories worldwide <a href="http://perma.cc/6Q3S-2FX7" target="_blank">conducted approximately 270,000 doping tests</a>; just over one percent revealed the use of banned substances. Testing done by the <a href="http://harvardjsel.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Milot.pdf" target="_blank">London and Beijing Olympics</a>, <a href="http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/15475310/number-major-league-baseball-drug-tests-increasing-year-year" target="_blank">MLB</a>, the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/06/sports/drug-testing-company-tied-to-ncaa-draws-criticism.html?ref=sports&amp;_r=0" target="_blank">NCAA</a>, and high school sports officials in <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/06/sports/drug-tests-for-high-school-athletes-fuel-debate.html" target="_blank">New Jersey</a> and <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/beat-steroid-tests-don-hooton_us_562ff93ae4b0c66bae5a04d1?ir=Sports&amp;section=sports&amp;utm_hp_ref=sports" target="_blank">Texas</a> reveal a similar rate of positives. Nobody believes the true incidence of sports doping is anywhere near that low. <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/23/sports/research-finds-wide-doping-study-withheld.html?_r=0" target="_blank">A 2013 WADA study</a> that anonymously surveyed more than 2,000 track and field athletes found that an estimated 29 percent of participants at the 2011 world championships and 45 percent of participants at the Pan-Arab Games had doped during the previous year. A 2015 study published in <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs40279-014-0247-x" target="_blank"><i>Sports Medicine</i></a> estimated that as many as 39 percent of elite international athletes used PEDs. One witness interviewed for a Cycling Independent Reform Commission report released last year <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/11458133/Cycling-doping-report-Drug-taking-remains-widespread.html" target="_blank">claimed that 90 percent of cyclists</a> use drugs, despite some of the toughest testing in sports.<br /><br />"Low rates of positive tests look good," says Lisa Milot, a former high-level junior cyclist and University of Georgia law school professor who studies sports and the human body. "But when you look behind the numbers, it's highly unsuccessful." Milot ticks off a list of high-profile doping scandals: BALCO; the Biogenesis case involving Rodriguez; the Tour de France in the late 1990s; Armstrong's fall; <a href="http://www.propublica.org/article/former-team-members-accuse-coach-alberto-salazar-of-breaking-drug-rules" target="_blank">credible allegations</a> that American distance running coach Alberto Salazar is doping his athletes; the current Russian affair. What do they have in common? Each was exposed by a whistleblower, law enforcement, investigative reporting, or some combination of the three.<br /><br />"None of those are testing results," Milot says. "They are things that show our testing regime has failed."<br /><br />A former professional cyclist who spoke to VICE Sports on the condition of anonymity is more blunt.<br /><br />"If you look at [USADA's] overall success rate, they are astoundingly ineffective," the cyclist says. "They spend more than $10 million a year, millions of that coming from the [federal] government, and they are fucking useless."<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1062px" data-original-width="1500px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470015228.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">USADA head Travis Tygart. Photo by David Butler II-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Anti-doping agencies worldwide generally lack subpoena, seizure, and other evidence-collection powers, and rely on actual police to share information. Conte argues that current programs are riddled with loopholes. For example, users can evade detection by taking smaller amounts of a particular PED in order to remain below test thresholds, a technique called "microdosing." Catlin believes that testing efforts are badly underfunded; <a href="http://thecatlinperspective.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">on his blog</a>, he once estimated that the total worldwide anti-doping budget was between $250 and $400 million—about the same as that of a small pharmaceutical company, and far less that the billions of dollars made by the athletes, teams, and organizations that have nothing to gain from positive tests. Where Logan wants a troop withdrawal, Catlin wants a financial surge.<br /><br />Charles Yesalis, a Penn State University emeritus professor and longtime sports-doping researcher, says that more money for testing probably won't yield better results. Not when athletes are simply too motivated, clever, and willing to push the envelope in order to win. To wit: a year-long professional sports PED investigation by the Australian Crime Commission found that athletes were using <a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-07/explainer-performance-enhancing-substances/4506126" target="_blank">a series of drugs that weren't on WADA's banned list</a>, including pig-brain and calf-blood extracts and an anti-obesity drug that was still going through human clinical trials.<br /><br />Four years ago, Pound co-authored a report for WADA's executive committee titled <a href="http://wada-main-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/resources/files/2013-05-12-Lack-of-effectiveness-of-testing-WG-Report-Final.pdf" target="_blank"><i>Lack of Effectiveness of Testing Programs</i></a>. Over 26 pages, he acknowledged that "testing has not proven to be particularly effective in detecting dopers/cheats," and blamed the futility on the lack of a "general appetite to undertake the effort and expense of ... doping-free sport." Here was a committed general in the doping war admitting that the drugs had won.<br /><br />Hoberman, the University of Texas professor, wasn't surprised. The history of sports anti-doping, he says, can in part be read as a history of public relations: the real aim of testing is to catch a few users, but not too many. After all, enhanced performances are good for the bottom line; scandals, not so much.<br /><br />"You're dealing with a global sports-entertainment industry with a gross turnover of about $400 billion per year," he says. "It's a Goliath that is interested in staying in business. Given what we know about the behavior of elite athletes, you simply cannot have effective anti-doping within that business model."<br /><br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="651px" data-original-width="1165px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470015515.jpg?output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">American sprinter Phil DeRosier was suspended for using a supplement containing a stimulant that was neither listed on the product's label nor WADA's banned substances list. YouTube</div><b><br /></b><br /><b>If the current anti-doping apparatus mostly fails to identify athletes who are trying to break the rules, </b>then what about the athletes who aren't? The 2015 documentary <a href="http://www.epix.com/movie/doped-the-dirty-side-of-sports/" target="_blank"><i>Doped: The Dirty Side of Sports</i></a> tells the story of Phil DeRosier, an American sprinter who served a six-month suspension for flunking a doping test. (Full disclosure: I also appear in an interview for the film, but not about DeRosier.) During that time, DeRosier couldn't race. Couldn't land sponsorships. He essentially lost a half-year's worth of income. Still, he would have been OK with that—if he had actually done something wrong.<br /><br />DeRosier had taken a legal nutritional supplement containing a stimulant, methylhexanamine, that was neither on the supplement's label nor on WADA's banned substance list. No matter. WADA rules allow athletes to be sanctioned not only for using specific banned substances but also for using "any and all similar substances." If that doesn't seem fair, well, it was enough for USADA.<br /><br />"In my opinion, I was a quota," DeRosier says in the film. "Somebody to show that they're doing their job."<br /><br />Other athletes have been punished under similarly dubious circumstances. LaShawn Merritt—the aforementioned American sprinter who ingested <a href="http://olympics.time.com/2012/07/18/penis-enhancement-a-7-11-miracle-beating-the-ioc-inside-lashawn-merritts-strange-olympic-journey/">a sexual enhancement supplement</a> containing a steroid hormone, ExtenZe, purchased at a convenience store after a night of dancing with his girlfriend—lost nearly two years of his career to the subsequent suspension, and had to fight a protracted legal battle in order to compete in the London Games. A decade earlier,<a href="http://www.itftennis.com/news/137917.aspx"> </a><a href="http://www.itftennis.com/news/137917.aspx">tennis journeyman Martin Rodriguez was busted</a> for having excess levels of—no, really—caffeine in his urine during a tournament in Switzerland.<br /><br />During his legal appeal, Rodriguez laid out his defense. He had been hanging out in the tournament's players' lounge, waiting to take the court. He was bored. A tournament sponsor was offering free espressos, which were being served by an "attractive female." Rodriguez usually drank three or four cups of coffee before his matches; on this particular day, he may have enjoyed a few extra. He wasn't counting. Oh, and he also ingested "one or two" colas during his match, which was absolutely fine with the chair umpire.<br /><br />In short, Rodriguez wasn't doping. He was <i>thirsty</i>. He still lost his appeal, and was forced to forfeit $6,725 in prize money. (WADA removed caffeine from its banned list in 2004.) After finishing <i>Doped</i>, filmmaker Andrew Muscato concluded that the sports war on drugs both underperforms and overreaches. "WADA's policies and conduct seem as if they treat all athletes as guilty athletes," he says. "Olympic athletes have to forfeit their privacy rights in order to compete. Is that fair if the system doesn't actually work?"<br /><br />Under WADA rules, athletes not only have to put up with piss police inspecting their sex organs during sample collection; they also must follow a "Whereabouts Rule"—that is, they are required to regularly report their current and planned locations to those same testers, who can then show up and demand blood and urine from them at any time, day or night. A decade ago, cyclist Kevin van Impe<a href="http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/van-impe-tested-at-crematorium-15187/"> </a><a href="http://www.bikeradar.com/news/article/van-impe-tested-at-crematorium-15187/">found himself giving a urine sample at a crematorium</a>, where he was arranging the funeral of his son, Jayden, who died six hours after being born; more recently, skier Lindsey Vonn was<a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more-sports/vonn-takes-surprise-drug-test-fashion-show-article-1.1364279"> </a><a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more-sports/vonn-takes-surprise-drug-test-fashion-show-article-1.1364279">pulled off the red carpet by USADA testers</a> while attending a New York fashion gala.<br /><br />Despite these shortcomings, the doping war shows no signs of slowing down. To the contrary, WADA announced last year that its investigations <a href="http://playboysfw.kinja.com/olympics-and-peds-meet-the-new-war-on-drugs-same-as-t-1516281389">will not be limited by national laws or restrictions placed on law enforcement.</a> The organization<a href="http://thesportdigest.com/2015/09/features-of-wadas-new-list-of-suspended-athlete-support-personnel/"> </a><a href="http://thesportdigest.com/2015/09/features-of-wadas-new-list-of-suspended-athlete-support-personnel/">keeps a blacklist</a> of people—mostly trainers and coaches associated with PEDs—with whom athletes are not allowed to associate. The standard Olympic sport suspension for major drug violations used to be two years; today, it's a career-killing four, and if an athlete believes they're being railroaded, like DeRosier or Merritt, they can expect to spend tens of thousands of dollars challenging anti-doping authorities in arbitration. All of this leaves Logan, the former USATF executive, asking a simple question: To what end?<br /><br />"The fact is that we have not made much in the way of inroads in enforcement of the myriad of regulated substances in the world," he says. "We're wasting enormous financial resources, human resources. Why not get rid of the drug cops, the laboratories, the silly lists of banned substances? Why inhumanely test athletes, waking them up in four in the morning and making them tell us 180 days in advance where they will spend the night, and with whom? All that stupid shit should stop."<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1507px" data-original-width="2264px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470015994.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Are anti-doping efforts a waste? Photo by Joe Camporeale-USA TODAY Sports</div><b><br /></b><br /><b>Andy Miah has a modest proposal. </b>If you're a sports fan, it may sound radical, even unfathomable. But hear him out. A professor and bioethicist at the University of Salford, Manchester (U.K.), Miah studies technology and biological enhancement, grappling with questions such as <i>In an era of genetic modification, what does it mean to be natural? Or human?</i> You know, simple stuff.<br /><br />Like Logan, Miah sees a doping war gone awry. A retrograde fight, out of step with both modern medicine and society, where we eagerly develop and deploy new technology to improve our collective lot. In sports, athletes are told to stay away from testosterone, which is a terrible, no-good shortcut to hollow, tainted glory; at home, middle-aged sports television viewers are encouraged to ask their doctors about AndroGel, a cream containing the same hormone, which could help them live richer, better lives.<br /><br />As such, Miah suggests, it's time to retire WADA—and replace the organization with a World <i>Pro-</i>Doping Agency.<br /><br />"The ethical concerns associated with doping are largely about the worries of medical professionals with the expanded use of therapeutic technologies for non-therapeutic ends," Miah wrote in an email interview with VICE Sports. "They are not keen on this era of human enhancement, and yet they want athletes to break new records. How can they do this without technology?<br /><br />"If records and results don't matter, then let's get rid of timing and medals. That would have my vote, but I suspect not many others, since elite sport is interested in the limits of humanity and our capacity to transcend them."<br /><br />Miah has been making his case for nearly a decade. At <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKHm7EwUU3Q" target="_blank">public debates on the topic</a>, he says, he's usually the guy "people love to hate." The arguments against doping are well worn and widely accepted. Prohibition, supporters claim, ensures that athletes who don't want to use drugs won't be forced to do so simply to keep up with their chemically powered peers. It preserves the sanctity of records—like career home run totals, and the fastest 100-meter dash time—across eras. It discourages children—who, medical experts agree, cannot safely use PEDs—from doping in a misguided effort to emulate their athletic heroes.<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1608px" data-original-width="1193px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470016173.jpg?output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Kids, don't try this at home. Photo by Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Miah admits that ending PED prohibition in sports wouldn't be perfect. Athletes still would be able to hurt themselves by abusing drugs, the same way patients can hurt themselves by abusing painkillers. But swap the current cops-and-robbers approach for a medical model that permits open, consensual doping under careful, responsible supervision, Miah says, and the odds of harm would go down.<br /><br />"There are lots of problems associated with taking drugs, so if we can find better alternatives, this is where we should focus efforts," he writes. "An athlete's health should still be monitored—and perhaps monitored even more closely—but that need not preclude them from using performance-enhancing technologies. We can decide what is an acceptable level of risk and then test for [that], but a starting point is to ensure that athletes can use substances that are generally accepted in society."<br /><br />While Miah's position is unusual, it's hardly <i>sui generis.</i> Milot, the former junior cyclist and law professor, <a href="http://harvardjsel.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Milot.pdf" target="_blank">made a similar argument</a> in the Harvard Law School's<i> Journal of Sport and Entertainment Law. </i>So have <a href="https://aeon.co/essays/why-we-should-legalise-most-doping-in-sport" target="_blank">University of Oxford bioethicist Julian Savulescu</a> and <a href="http://www.drugpolicy.org/blog/banning-drugs-sports-does-not-reduce-drug-use-makes-things-unsafe-players" target="_blank">the Drug Policy Alliance</a>, a nonprofit devoted to reforming the larger War on Drugs. Nearly two decades ago, former NFL lineman and admitted steroid user Steve Courson argued in the pages of <a href="http://www.si.com/vault/1988/11/14/118831/steroids-another-view-all-we-can-do-this-former-player-argues-is-monitor-usage" target="_blank"><i>Sports Illustrated</i></a> that doping was inevitable, and that pretending otherwise produced nothing but hypocrisy. Did fans and coaches really believe that athletes like him could weigh 295 pounds and bench-press 600 pounds without chemical help? Were league officials serious when they warned players about the physical risks of steroids, as if football itself wasn't chock-full of bodily danger? Sounding a lot like Miah, Courson concluded that it would be better to have doctors monitor PED use and side effects than to have athletes getting their health information from "some guy on the street or at the gym."<br /><br />"It would be great if sports were pure and steroids weren't a factor," Courson wrote. "It would be great also if we lived in a world without nuclear weapons."<br /><br />What would a sports world that accepted doping, or even embraced it, look like? According to Logan, there would be far fewer scandals. Less corruption, too. The ongoing Russian affair is a morass of bribery and deceit: top Russian sports, anti-doping, and state security officials <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/rio-2016/2016/07/18/mclaren-report-widespread-russian-doping/87240628/" target="_blank">lying to WADA about some positive drug tests, and breaking into supposedly tamper-proof bottles to cover up others</a>; senior officials from the governing bodies of world and Russian track and field <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/jan/07/iaaf-bans-four-officials-doping-papa-massata-diack" target="_blank">extorting hush money from athletes to cover up PED use</a>; French police investigating the head of track and field's world governing body, Lamine Diack, his advisor, and the organization's former doping chief <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/nov/04/lamine-diack-investigation-iaaf-corruption-doping" target="_blank">on suspicion of accepting more than one million euros to do the same</a>; and a report that Diack's organization, the IOC, and even WADA all <a href="http://www.sportingintelligence.com/2016/07/25/exposed-the-story-behind-the-story-of-russia-doping-and-the-ioc-250701/" target="_blank">either ignored or declined to act</a> on evidence of systemic Russian doping presented to them in 2013.<br /><br />The common thread? If PEDs were permitted, Logan says, none of this arguably would have happened. No secrets to keep, no payoffs to make. No subterfuge required. "Crime begets crime," he says. "Make something criminal, and there will be offshoots."<br /><br />Scrap prohibition, he adds, and fans won't have to worry about attaching asterisks to sprint times and home run totals. Athletes such as Armstrong won't have to submit to humiliating genital checks, or lie about what it really takes to ride up the side of a mountain faster than anyone ever has before. They won't have to live in a state of constant paranoia about what they put in their bodies, either—scanning energy-drink and supplement bottle labels, cross-checking banned substance lists, forever aware that today's perfectly legal compound is tomorrow's career-derailer.<br /><br />Earlier this year, tennis star Maria Sharapova received a two-year competitive ban after testing positive for meldonium, a heart medication she had been taking since a Moscow doctor prescribed it as an immune system booster in 2006. Hundreds of other athletes also have tested positive for the drug, which WADA added to its banned list at the beginning of 2016—even though there's <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/2016/04/05/meldonium-experts-wada-performance-enhancing-drug/82663156/" target="_blank">no scientific evidence</a> that it enhances athletic performance. Is that fair? Does it solve an actual problem? The anonymous former pro cyclist is skeptical.<br /><br />"You have these WADA people completely crucifying a whole bunch of athletes for this," he says. "Show me one study that proves it's performance-enhancing. Show me. Because if you can't, it shouldn't be on the list. And they just fucked hundreds of athletes."<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1743px" data-original-width="1240px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470016342.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Maria Sharapova is serving a two-year competitive ban for a positive meldonium test. Photo by Jayne Kamin-Oncea-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Like meldonium, most drugs with established performance-enhancing effects are first and foremost medicines. Human Growth Hormone is prescribed to treat growth deficit in children and pituitary gland problems in adults. Anabolic steroids are used to counteract muscle wasting from HIV/AIDS. EPO is given to treat anemia in cancer patients. As an American Medical Association doctor told Congress during a 1989 steroid hearing, patients under supervision can use the drugs safely, but medical monitoring is crucial. As is the case with other medicines, PEDs can produce dangerous side effects, including severe acne, liver damage, heart disease, and increased risk of stroke. Yet as Miah and Courson point out, prohibition pushes PED use underground. It drives athletes away from competent doctors, and toward the likes of BALCO's Conte—a self-taught nutritionist who didn't attend medical school, but<i> did</i> play bass in the 1970s R&amp;B group Tower of Power—or Biogenesis's Tony Bosch, a medical school dropout who <a href="http://medium.com/matter/the-untold-and-insanely-weird-story-of-a-rods-doping-habits-e888f08e012a#.bv4j6hvbw" target="_blank">once drew blood from the baseball player Rodriguez in the bathroom of a Miami nightclub</a>.<br /><br />The anonymous professional cyclist was part of a team that doped. The cyclist says they did so carefully, both to avoid detection and to protect their health. Among the drugs they used was the red-blood-cell-booster EPO. The average person's proportion of red blood cells, or hematocrit number, is <a href="http://www.livescience.com/34281-doping-legal.html" target="_blank">around 44 percent</a>. According to a 2004 article in the <i>British Journal of Sports Medicine</i>, a hematocrit reading of 51 percent or more increases the risk of stroke and heart attack. The anonymous cyclist's team kept their levels around 47 percent, roughly the same range that can be achieved through high-altitude training. "Sitting here [now], I have zero side effects from EPO," says the cyclist. "The system we had in place was completely conservative."<br /><br />The cyclist explains that the doctor overseeing his team's PED program "believed that, yes, you have to do this, because everyone was doing this. But we were not going to be reckless or crazy. If one [injection] gets you to the finish line, one is enough. We're not going to do ten. We had a situation with a drug that was ten percent beneficial [to performance], completely undetectable, and if taken under a doctor's care, completely safe. I was cool with that. No problem.<br /><br />"But there was other stuff out there. Synthetic hemoglobin. PFC [<a href="http://www.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/latest_news/2013/?a=28410" target="_blank">a dangerous drug invented to treat severe battlefield blood loss</a>]. Veterinary stuff. Clinical trials stuff. Crazy stuff. You see that, and you're like, 'I don't even care if it's cheating or not, somebody is going to croak here.' You can get into some pretty bad shit, pretty quick."<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1640px" data-original-width="2464px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470016727.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">The peloton during the 2012 London Games cycling road race. Photo by Mark J. Rebilas-USA TODAY Sports</div><b><br /></b><br /><b>The cyclist isn't exaggerating.</b> The sports doping war doesn't just leave athletes relying on sketchy doctors. It leaves them relying on sketchy drugs—whatever substances are available over the internet or from illicit channels, or unusual enough to have not yet drawn attention from testers.<br /><br />Barry Bonds <a href="http://espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=2358236" target="_blank">reportedly took trenbolone</a>, a steroid created to improve the muscle quality of cattle. <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/cycling/11458133/Cycling-doping-report-Drug-taking-remains-widespread.html" target="_blank">The CIRC doping report</a> suggested that cyclists are experimenting with GW1516—a substance that burns fat, increases muscle mass, and sends more oxygen to the muscles but also "was not given clinical approval because it was thought to cause cancer." In a 1994 <i>Loyola of Los Angeles Entertainment Law Review</i> <a href="http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1288&amp;context=elr" target="_blank">article on steroid regulation</a>, author John Burge writes that imported or clandestinely manufactured steroids may be "far more dangerous" than those produced by American companies regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. For example, a former NFL drug adviser said he had seen people develop "everything from gangrene of the arm to an abscess on the hip" from using black-market drugs, while in an unrelated case, a user injected an entire vial of penicillin that had been mislabeled as a steroid.<br /><br />In her own article, Milot cites a 2009 study in which researchers found that between 21 and 53 percent of the black-market steroids they examined were counterfeit, and that some contained harmful bacteria. "What happens is that in order to circumvent testing, people shift from relatively safe drugs to ones we know nothing about," she says. "Or they take oral steroids instead of injectable ones—because the orals clear your system faster. Well, they also cause organ damage. From a health perspective, that is a disaster."<br /><br />Would above-board PED use always be responsible? Probably not. East Germany's secretive, state-sponsored sports doping program was <a href="http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article24780097.html" target="_blank">a medical and ethical nightmare</a>, with unscrupulous scientists causing lasting harm to unwitting athletes. In a famous biannual survey of elite athletes in the 1980s, more than half of the respondents said they would <a href="http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/phys-ed-will-olympic-athletes-dope-if-they-know-it-might-kill-them/?_r=1" target="_blank">take a drug that guaranteed them a gold medal but would also kill them within five years</a>.<br /><br />Even with sound medical advice and responsible limits on what <i>kind </i>of doping is permitted, some competitors will be willing to take foolish risks—and if the <a href="http://www.patrickhruby.net/2014/05/the-price-of-pain.html" target="_blank">excessively liberal use of painkillers in the NFL</a> is any indication, some ethically flexible doctors will be willing to enable them. That's part of the athletic mindset: if one pill works, gobble a handful; if high-octane gas makes the engine run better, then add some nitro. Back when Milot was a high-level junior cyclist, she says, she received a phone call in the middle of a night. It was a friend, a fellow racer. Her tone was urgent: <i>When you get up in the morning, go to GNC</i>, <i>and buy as much of product X as you can.</i><br /><br />Milot was bleary-eyed, still half-asleep. She asked why.<br /><br /><i>They just banned product X. It must work!</i><br /><br />"It didn't matter that the stated reason for the ban was that the product caused hallucinations, and caused people to jump out of windows and injure themselves," Milot says. "Athletes are risk-takers. There's no way to get to the international level of sports without being willing to put your body on the line on a regular basis."<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="502px" data-original-width="797px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470017923.jpg?output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">East Germany's state-sponsored doping program was a medical and ethical nightmare. Wikipedia</div><br />Nevertheless, Milot argues, athletes would be better off knowing exactly what's going in their bodies, and what that might mean for their long-term health. So would society at large. Most of what the medical community currently understands about the benefits and drawbacks of PED use comes from studying sick people. As for healthy athletes? <a href="http://espn.go.com/espn/commentary/news/story?page=hruby/101013" target="_blank">According to Charles Yesalis</a>, the Penn State epidemiologist, most of what we <i>presume</i> to know comes from surveys of bodybuilders, who generally are taking massive quantities of drugs of dubious composition and origin. Talk to scientists, and they'll tell you that the sports doping war, and its accompanying moral hysteria, makes it almost impossible to study doping with any real rigor.<br /><br />"It's hard to tell someone don't take this thing because it's bad for you, but we don't have data showing that," Milot says. "What we should be doing now is gathering information in order to understand how these substances work on healthy bodies. Focusing on that, rather than punishment."<br /><br />Regarding punishment, Logan has a question: If an athlete can safely use a particular drug to run faster or jump higher, why is that wrong? Moreover, what if the substance in question <i>enables</i> performance, either by helping aging athletes extend their careers or by allowing injured athletes to return to play? These aren't hypotheticals: near the end of his time in the NFL, retired running back Abdul-Karim al-Jabbar <a href="http://espn.go.com/espn/news/story?id=2574291" target="_blank">had human growth hormone injected into his battered knee</a> to stimulate the creation of cartilage; last year, Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban helped fund <a href="http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/14288703/michigan-study-funded-dallas-mavericks-mark-cuban-lead-rethinking-hgh" target="_blank">a University of Michigan clinical trial</a> studying whether the same drug can aid recovery from anterior cruciate ligament surgery. <a href="http://espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2733919" target="_blank">ESPN's Tom Farrey reports</a> that researchers have found high rates of hormonal deficiency—specifically, HGH and testosterone—among victims of head trauma, likely due to damage to the pituitary gland, a pea-sized organ that sits at the base of the brain. Given the hard-hitting nature of sports like football, is it ethical to <i>deny</i> football players PEDs? Rather than protecting athletes, it's possible that prohibition is hurting some of them.<br /><br />"The lines between enhancement and therapy are not clear," Milot says. "We like to pretend they are."<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1491px" data-original-width="1990px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470018514.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Taking testosterone made amateur cyclist and author Andrew Tilin more empathetic to the likes of Lance Armstrong. Photo by Olivier Hoslet-EPA</div><b><br /></b><br /><b>Andrew Tilin doped. </b>And frankly, he enjoyed it. For almost a year in the early 2000s, the Austin, Texas-based writer and amateur cyclist took testosterone, the same hormone used by athletes from Armstrong to Bonds, and also <a href="http://fusion.net/story/42619/why-testosterone-is-the-drug-of-the-future/" target="_blank">available at anti-aging clinics</a> across America.<br /><br /><br /><br />At the time, Tilin was in his early 40s. Testosterone—or, as he calls it, "the T"—increasingly was being peddled to middle-aged men as a pharmaceutical fountain of youth. On his bike, Tilin found that the drug worked as advertised. Long rides used to leave him feeling "ruined"; now he could train even harder the next day. And off the bike? "It was if I had eight cups of coffee in me," says Tilin, who <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Doper-Next-Door-Scandalous-Performance-Enhancing/dp/1582437157" target="_blank">wrote about his experience</a> in <i>The Doper Next Door: My Strange and Scandalous Year on Performance-Enhancing Drugs.</i> "I wanted my wife like I was 18. I'd go to a restaurant, check out a waitress, and not even feel bad about it. That sounds crass. But it was sometimes fun."<br /><br />After quitting the drug, Tilin fretted about possible side effects. Would he never enjoy another erection? Would he end up with gynecomastia, the hormone-induced breast tissue growth <a href="http://gothamist.com/2009/04/30/bio_says_a-rod_juiced_as_a_yankee_w.php" target="_blank">colloquially known as "bitch tits?"</a> Nothing materialized. Instead, he was left with newfound empathy. A longtime cycling fan, he used to watch the Tour de France with a hypercritical eye. <i>They're all out of their minds on EPO. Cheaters! </i><br /><br />"Now when people are busted, it doesn't move my needle," he says. "Of course they're on drugs. It's what these guys do for a living."<br /><br />Tilin spins a hypothetical: "Imagine you're best writer at a magazine, you've basically been given all the best feature stories for years, and then one day Joe Smith comes in—who has always been mediocre—and suddenly and inexplicably, he's getting all the good work and adulation," he says. "Then his dealer pulls you aside and says, 'Here are the green pills I've been giving Joe.' What would you do?"<br /><br />Tilin grasps the hypocrisy of the sports doping war. He acknowledges the arbitrary rules—how does LASIK surgery that corrects a golfer or baseball player's vision to better than 20/20 not qualify as unlawful enhancement again?—and ineffective enforcement. He feels for the athletes caught in the crosshairs. Like Logan and others, he thinks the fight can't be won. And yet, at book signings, Tilin says, amateur bike racers would show up to heckle him. <i>Cheater!</i> His current girlfriend is a hardcore triathlete. She hates his book. Calls it "a corruption."<br /><br />There is a deep moralistic vein in athletics, a near-mystical preoccupation with notions of clean and dirty, of natural and unnatural. In the early 1980s, former IOC president <a href="https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1309&amp;dat=19891214&amp;id=NbJUAAAAIBAJ&amp;sjid=dpADAAAAIBAJ&amp;pg=5690,3845277&amp;hl=en" target="_blank">Michael Morris said</a> that the "creation of artificial man is something that will kill sport"; roughly a decade earlier, <i>Sports Illustrated's </i>Gilbert concluded his three-part doping series by proclaiming that drug use strikes at the fundamental nature of our games—namely, competition between equals.<br /><br />"If you legalize drugs, my fear is that it becomes an arms race as to who can get the most in their veins, the choicest in their veins," Tilin says. "As much as we keep losing, I think we should keep fighting. Because the other side is actually darker."<br /><hr /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1930px" data-original-width="2855px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470018996.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">More than 100 Russian athletes have been banned from participating in the Rio Olympics. Photo by Hannibal Hanschke-EPA</div><b><br /></b><br /><b>Max Mehlman, </b>a bioethics and law professor at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, has been arguing against PED prohibition since the 1990s. At the time, the Human Genome Project was underway, and Mehlman was grappling with the ethics of genetic enhancement for the National Institutes of Health. A professional colleague mentioned doping, and how it ran contrary to "the spirit of sports."<br /><br />"I asked what that meant," says Mehlman, who also has studied stimulant use in the military. "The more I probed, the more no one could really explain it in a convincing way."<br /><br />Mehlman has debated athletes, sportswriters, other academics, even Dick Pound, the former WADA head. Doping is wrong, he was told, because it's against the rules. <i>OK, but no one makes a high-minded crusade out of preventing handballs in soccer.</i> Wrong because it's risky. <i>Sure, but so is juvenile gymnastics.</i> Wrong because, well, drugs. <i>So how do you explain pain-numbing cortisone shots?</i><br /><br />"I had one sportswriter tell me that the difference between steroids and something like a carbon fiber vaulting pole is that you swallow steroids," he says. "And that makes them bad."<br /><br />Eventually, Mehlman concluded that the sports doping war had less to do with protecting athletes—people still boxed and played football, didn't they?—than with protecting an idea: the level playing field. Sports as a meritocracy, with on-field results rewarding hard work and desire.<br /><br />And that, in turn, makes Mehlman wonder: Do sports have things backwards? "With doping bans, we're not just comparing effort [in competitions]," he says. "We're comparing luck. Having the good luck to inherit good genes, and to be born into a wealthy, sports-oriented family. Having access to the best coaches. An enormous amount of accomplishment is due to those factors. Doping could be seen as a way of leveling this playing field. Why not let people who are not so lucky in the game of genetic roulette dope?"<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="1856px" data-original-width="2784px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/08/01/the-drugs-won-the-case-for-ending-the-sports-war-on-doping-body-image-1470019507.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" /></div><div class="photo-credit">Could legalized doping remove hurdles to a level playing field? Photo by Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports</div><br />Earlier this year, Scottish academic Paul Dimeo <a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/legalise-banned-drugs-and-allow-blood-doping-says-sports-expert-cvr63dz2m" target="_blank">gave an interview</a> to <i>The Times</i> of London in which he said that the ideal of the natural athlete is an anachronism, that some drugs can be safely used for recovery and performance, and that maybe, just maybe, sports doping policies deserve some careful reexamination. He <a href="http://www.usacycling.org/usac-announces-changes-to-anti-doping-committee.htm" target="_blank">promptly was removed</a> from his position as chair of USA Cycling's anti-doping committee. Like Logan, he was simply calling for a conversation—and like Tilin, he was met with puritanical scorn.<br /><br />"Drugs are really hard to manage," says Hoberman, the University of Texas historian. "You have to admit that. But our society has a very hard time dealing with them in a rational way."<br /><br />Can anything change? Last year, the Drug Enforcement Agency announced <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/raids-steroid-labs-suggest-market-for-steroids-beyond-elite-athletes%0A" target="_blank">that it had busted</a> 16 underground steroid labs and seized hundreds of thousands of PED doses in an undercover operation spanning 20 states and four foreign countries. Investigative journalist and author David Epstein noted the obvious—<i>that's a lot of juice</i>—before pointing out the subtext: <i>That's a lot of juicing.</i> Far more than can be pinned on high-level athletes.<br /><br />To wit: between 2005 and 2011, <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2012/12/31/human-growth-hormone-abuse/1801289/" target="_blank">inflation-adjusted sales of HGH</a> reportedly rose 69 percent; by contrast, sales of the average prescription drug rose 12 percent over the same span. Ours is a doping culture, Hoberman says, one in which military pilots rely on amphetamines and Modafinil to stay awake, <a href="http://magazine.gsu.edu/article/the-new-normal/" target="_blank">students</a> and <a href="http://chronicle.com/article/Many-Academics-Use-Drugs-to/40788" target="_blank">professors</a> alike pop Adderall to study, <a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/73873610/peds-steroids-hollywood-blockbusters-jason-momoa-chris-evans" target="_blank">Hollywood actors and producers</a> use PEDs to get buff, and the rest of us guzzle energy drinks and double-shot cappuccinos to power through our workdays.<br /><br />In 2012, researchers had 1,200 college students fill out a questionnaire describing two scenarios: a runner who used steroids to win a race, and a student who used stimulants to ace an exam. <a href="https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/adb-26-3-678.pdf" target="_blank">Respondents judged the runner to be a bigger cheater</a>, with one telling caveat: respondents who previously had used stimulants without a prescription were more forgiving of the fictional test-taker. Familiarity breeds understanding. Understanding spawns acceptance. As society at large follows Tilin's lead, smearing testosterone cream into our collective armpits, will we continue to demand that athletes do as we say, and not as we do?<br /><br />"This is all bullshit," Logan says. "I happen to live in a retirement community. Ladies with blue hair go down to strip malls and get injections of HGH on a daily basis. No one says they should be ineligible to go to dinner and have the 4:30 blue plate special. We have a pill for everything."<br /><br />In many ways, Hoberman says, the war on doping is simply a branch of the larger War on Drugs: born during the Nixon Administration, intensified under President Ronald Reagan, and increasingly viewed as a wasteful, harmful, self-perpetuating failure by everyone involved—a losing battle not against any particular substance, but rather human nature. Mandatory minimums are on the way out. Marijuana is on the way in. Someday, perhaps, the sports world will take a hint.<br /><br />After all, we've been here before. In 1973, the United States Senate <a href="http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED086919.pdf" target="_blank">held hearings</a> to investigate drug use by athletes. Among the experts testifying was Lawrence Golding, a Kent State University doctor who had studied the effects of PEDs on sports performance—particularly amphetamines, <a href="http://www.kawasaki-m.ac.jp/soc/mw/journal/en/2006-e12-1/01_kremenik.pdf" target="_blank">one of the first drugs banned by the IOC</a>. Athletes dope, Golding said, because they're trying to win. In <a href="https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=Mp1MAAAAIBAJ&amp;sjid=yTUDAAAAIBAJ&amp;pg=7424,3771449&amp;dq=steroids+baseball&amp;hl=en" target="_blank">a subsequent interview</a>, he was asked how to curb use. Testing? Punishment? Golding shrugged. "Prohibition," he said, "never worked in keeping us from drinking whiskey."Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-74323815941670839532016-04-19T08:22:00.000-04:002016-08-27T11:09:09.146-04:00High And Dry<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2goITi5kCO0/UuvMOA1keNI/AAAAAAAADaU/ZUai25RHzt80p4ivdRKFkJ3FWvTpnbN7gCPcB/s1600/concussionsnfl-640x400.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-2goITi5kCO0/UuvMOA1keNI/AAAAAAAADaU/ZUai25RHzt80p4ivdRKFkJ3FWvTpnbN7gCPcB/s1600/concussionsnfl-640x400.jpg" /></a></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>The rejected NFL concussion settlement appeal leaves former players with CTE out of luck.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | April 2014</attribution></div></br><br /><b><span class="drop-cap">T</span>he call came last month.</b> I wasn't expecting it. It was a retired NFL player, a 30-something defensive lineman who had been hit in the head more times than he could possibly count, and he was hurting. Screaming, mostly. Crying, too. Then screaming some more.<br /><br />The lineman couldn't concentrate. Couldn't sleep. Felt like he had demons inside. He took psychiatric medication, but that didn't seem to help. He was a college-educated man, he told me, only now he had trouble reading, struggled to make sense of a one-page letter. He was separated from his family, living in another state—the only workable solution to waking up in the middle of night punching the pillows next to his wife's face, and desperately, irrationally wanting to use those same fists whenever he heard his young children cry.<br /><br />Football, he said, was like a scab, ripped open every time a fan mentioned the glory days. The lineman wanted to get away. Disappear. <i>Never hear the fucking letters N-F-L again.</i> He felt alone, paranoid, and betrayed. When he signed up for the sport, he agreed to sacrifice his body in order to give his family a better life; he did not agree to lose his goddamn mind in the process. Yet here he was: standing in front of a mirror, wearing his old game jersey, talking about killing himself. <br /><br />"Bro, I am ready to go out like Junior Seau," he said. "Today I will die with a smile and a middle finger in the air. I promise you, I guarantee you I have [chronic traumatic encephalopathy] CTE. As a team player, I am willing to die for my teammates. I am willing to follow Seau's lead."<br /><br />I'm not a medical expert. I have no idea if the lineman has CTE, the neurodegenerative disease linked to repetitive brain trauma and at the heart of <i>League of Denial,</i> found by researchers in 90 of the 94 brains of former NFL players that they've studied. More to the point, no one else has any definitive idea, either—and no one will, not until slivers of his brain are someday put under a microscope. It could be that he's right, given that his problems <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/how-football-pulled-the-trigger-zack-langstons-family-reflects-on-his-tragically-short-life">jive with other CTE cases</a>. It could be that he's wrong, and that he's actually dealing with another type of brain damage. It even could be that his issues have nothing to do with football or brain trauma in the first place.<br /><br />Still, I couldn't help but think of the lineman when <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/highlight/appeals-court-affirms-nfl-concussion-settlement">a federal appellate court upheld the long-contested NFL class action concussion lawsuit settlement on Monday</a>, dismissing objections that the deal doesn't do enough to compensate former players diagnosed with CTE, or those suffering from symptoms associated with the disease. I couldn't help but think of Seau, Frank Gifford, Ken Stabler, Earl Morrall, and Tyler Sash; I couldn't help but think of all the CTE cases yet to come. Including, perhaps, the lineman.<br /><br />To a man, I wish them luck. Because in the wake of this appeals court ruling, both they and their families are going to need it.<br /><br />A quick reminder: for retired NFL players as a whole, <a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/the-nfl-concussion-settlement-is-pure-evil">the concussion settlement is not a particularly good deal</a>. It's certainly better than nothing, and likely the best agreement that the particular plaintiffs' lawyers in charge of negotiating with the league could muster. In exchange for waiving future class action suits against the NFL and allowing the league to remain silent on the question of what it knew about brain damage and when it knew it, some former players—specifically, those with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and Parkinson's disease, as well as individuals suffering from severe, drooling-in-a-nursing-home dementia symptoms—will receive some much-needed financial help. And that's admirable. <br /><br />On the other hand, most players with CTE will get nothing, or close to it. How so? Two ways. First, NFL retirees posthumously diagnosed with the disease between January 1, 2006 and April of last year can receive up to $4 million—but all subsequent diagnoses, including those of Stabler and Sash, will not be compensated. Not a penny, no matter what neuropatholgists find in their brain tissue. Second, living retirees suffering from the life-altering mood and behavior disorders associated with the CTE—including depression, explosive anger, and impulsive behavior—will not be compensated, either.<br /><br />The objectors to the settlement—about 90 retired players in total—asked that the deal be altered to do the following: a) compensate future cases of CTE diagnosed after death; b) test and pay for those mood and behavior disorders; c) accommodate the future development of tests to detect CTE in living brains, something many scientists believe will happen within the next decade. Federal judge Anita Brody, who oversaw the settlement—and famously asked a top plaintiff's lawyer "what's TBI?" about the basic acronym for<i> traumatic brain injury </i>during the deal's 2014 fairness hearing, which is either darkly or squid-ink humorous, depending on your level of cynicism—wasn't persuaded by their arguments. Nor was a three-judge appeals panel. While the arguments for accepting the settlement are complex—basically, they boil down to a mix of rock-ribbed legal procedural precedent and a winning parade of Teach The Controversy scientific witnesses trotted out by the NFL and the plaintiff's lawyers—the long-term ramifications of the deal for former football players are not.<br /><br />If you're a NFL retiree suffering from CTE, you are pretty much on your own. At least for the foreseeable future.<br /><br />Given the amount of public attention—and what former NFL commissioner Paul Tagliabue once called "pack journalism" media hype—focused on football-induced brain damage, you might assume that CTE is a matter of front-burner medical concern, the subject of several large, well-funded studies, headed by the best and brightest scientific minds, all racing to better understand and treat the disease. Nope. Boston University researchers are doing what they can with <a href="http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/14417386/nfl-pulls-funding-boston-university-head-trauma-study-concerns-researcher">a modest National Institutes of Health grant that the NFL reportedly tried to defund;</a> Harvard University researchers recently observed what appears to be a direct casual link between TBI and misfolded tau protein <a href="https://hms.harvard.edu/news/impact-insight">in mouse brains</a>; doctors at Mount Sinai in New York have made significant, preliminary progress on a <a href="https://www.mountsinai.org/about-us/newsroom/press-releases/neuroimaging-technique-identifies-concussion-related-brain-disease-in-living-brain">technique to image CTE in living brains</a>; and a handful of other scientists <a href="http://www.utsouthwestern.edu/labs/diamond/">are doing excellent work</a>. But there is no Manhattan Project. A cure is not forthcoming. A few years ago, former NFL Players' Association executive committee member Sean Morey <a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/60617808/nfl-players-shouldnt-settle-for-what-they-were-handed-in-the-concussion-lawsuit-deal">proposed spending millions of dollars of already-earmarked collective bargaining agreement money on a large-scale clinical research program</a> that would study and treat former players with brain damage; the union instead spent the money on a 10-year Harvard project that <a href="http://https//footballplayershealth.harvard.edu/">has a very nice-looking website</a>, but hasn't produced any notable results beyond the aforementioned mouse brain paper.<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="744px" data-original-width="1118px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/19/the-rejected-nfl-concussion-settlement-appeal-leaves-former-players-with-cte-high-and-dry-body-image-1461024123.jpg?output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: small; text-align: start;">Browns tight end Jordan Cameron after suffering a concussion against Oakland. Photo: Ken Blaze-USA TODAY Sports.</span></td></tr></tbody></table>Moreover, getting helpful and appropriate care is a crapshoot. <a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/after-the-impact-where-soldiers-and-former-football-players-seek-help-for-injuries-that-never-heal">Our Aaron Gordon recently wrote about the After the Impact ranch</a>, a Michigan-based facility that is partially funded by the NFL Players' Association and treats football and military TBI victims in a comprehensive fashion. It's a standout program, and there are very few like it. I know a retired NFL player who suffered multiple concussions during his career, and many, many sub-concussive hits to the head. He suffers from intense migraines, focus and concentration problems, intermittent fits of uncharacteristic anger, and memory lapses. He doesn't know if he has CTE, but he has shown me an experimental scan of his brain, and there are bright red tau tangles in all of the areas consistent with the disease. This player is extremely smart and capable, but his life is extremely difficult, both at home and at work. Over the last few years, he has seen a half-dozen neurological experts, some of them world-class, all in an effort to heal himself. He has more bottles of medication than most hotel minibars have bottles of liquor. The drugs make a difference—not by making him better, but by making his symptoms more bearable. <br /><br />Still, he was only able to find the right assistance by seeking it out himself, by having the time, knowledge and means to go beyond what his family doctor or a local neurologist could offer. How many suffering former players have the same luxury? How many see a marriage counselor whose well-meaning advice can't fix domestic outbursts that come from damaged frontal lobes? Or take antidepressants that don't work, because they're treating the wrong neurochemical processes? Or just self-medicate with marijuana, alcohol, or harder drugs, because hell, at least they numb the pain? And even if those NFL retirees locate the right doctors, who pays for what is essentially bespoke medical care? The league's retirement benefits can be notoriously difficult to access for relatively simple problems like damaged knees and degenerative hips; <a href="http://www.si.com/nfl/2014/01/29/dwight-harrison-nfl-pension">trying to get brain damage covered can be a nightmare</a>, and <i>that's in addition to having brain damage.</i><br /><br />With the concussion settlement wrapped up, this is what former players with CTE face: a 65-year legal deal that leaves them high and dry. A league that just got around—as in: a few weeks ago—to clumsily admitting that football and the disease are linked, and repeatedly has shown it's not in any particular hurry to explore that connection, especially if doing so costs money or is bad for business. Retirees can't rely on the medical community to quickly solve the problem, either—researchers are few and far between, badly underfunded, largely dependent on a conflicted football industry for cash, and that's when they're not busy claiming CTE isn't really a thing, anyway; more to the point, big pharma and major medical centers aren't about to pour hundreds of millions into developing therapies they can sell to, like, maybe 10,000 former football players over a couple of decades. Adding insult to injury, those same retirees can't even count on their once-adoring fans to be empathetic. Not when there are fantasy football lineups to fill out, and besides, <i>why are those guys complaining? They knew the risks.</i><br /><br />No, the only thing former players can count on going forward is the same thing the retired player who called me out of the blue could count on. The men in the mirror. And that, more than anything else, has me worried about what's to come. Where are these players supposed to turn? How will they seek relief and redress, and who will they end up blaming? Near the end of our conversation—after which the retired player connected with some much-needed professional help, much to my relief—he brought up the settlement. <br /><br />"Will I get any money from this lawsuit?" he asked me. "Are you telling me know one knows?"<i> </i><br />I wanted to tell him the truth: that he probably wouldn't get anything. Before I could speak, he kept talking.<br /><br />"I don't want their fucking money," he said. "I want my family back. I want to remember my kids. I want to be able to hold them and not throw them on the fucking ground when they start crying. Give me that."<br /><br />And what, I asked, if no one can?<br /><br />"Then I want a pound of flesh," he said. "The only way to get to the NFL is dead bodies, bro. Stack 'em up to let them see."<br /><br /><b><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/the-rejected-nfl-concussion-settlement-appeal-leaves-former-players-with-cte-high-and-dry" target="_blank">Read the original article at VICE Sports</a></b>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-56818741129805545882016-04-04T17:29:00.000-04:002016-08-27T11:45:20.458-04:00Four Years A Student-Athlete<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1i5ypwsZZNk/V7ccBVZojpI/AAAAAAAADZI/0vHDqS-fpjIOgnYrSOgTKOQuwNun7HR_ACLcB/s1600/untitled-article-1459778599.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1i5ypwsZZNk/V7ccBVZojpI/AAAAAAAADZI/0vHDqS-fpjIOgnYrSOgTKOQuwNun7HR_ACLcB/s1600/untitled-article-1459778599.jpg" /></a></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>The racial injustice of big-time college sports.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | April 2016</attribution></div></br><br /><b><span class="drop-cap">B</span></b>efore Robert and Amy McCormick could see the racial injustice at the heart of big-time college sports,</b> they had to wake up—literally. It was the summer of 2002, and the McCormicks, a married pair of professors at Michigan State University, were living in an East Lansing neighborhood located between a block of student housing and the school's athletic department.<br /><br />Every morning around 5:30 a.m., Michigan State athletes would ride their bicycles past the McCormicks' house on their way to practice. Among them was Charles Rogers, one of the best college football players in the country, a tall, speedy wide receiver whom professional scouts were likening to National Football League star Randy Moss.<br /><br />One morning, Robert saw Rogers whizzing by, his 6-foot-3 frame dwarfing a rickety bike that barely seemed road worthy. <i>He's a first-round NFL draft choice,</i> thought the sports and labor law professor, who had attended Michigan State himself and taught a sports law class at the university since 1984. <i>Next year, he'll be making millions. But now, he's making nothing.</i><br /><i><br /></i> The imbalance ate at the McCormicks: college sports were a multibillion-dollar business, and here was a top talent stuck with a dilapidated two-wheel. While standing on the field at the school's Spartan Stadium during a football game, something else struck Robert, an image he couldn't shake. The players were in uniform, covered in Michigan State's green and white colors, but Robert could see their bare lower legs. "Almost all of them," he says, "were black." Just like Rogers. Meanwhile, everyone else—the coaches, the administrators, the faces in the crowd, and Robert himself—was overwhelmingly white.<br /><br />"I saw a small group of black faces in the stands, and they were [football] recruits," Robert says. "It was incredible. I realized all of the people being paid or getting the pleasure out of the game were white, and the vast majority of the people playing and risking their health were black."<br /><br />When the championship game of the National Collegiate Athletic Association's men's basketball tournament between the University of North Carolina and Villanova University tips off tonight in Houston, the scene will be similar, a microcosm of major college revenue sports as a whole. Most of the players on the court—whose sweat and sacrifice make the whole show possible—will be African-American. Almost everybody else, from Tar Heels coach Roy Williams and Wildcats coach Jay Wright to the corporate glad-handers in the luxury boxes, will not. The game will be the culmination of another successful season for a cash-rich campus athletics industry—and thanks to the NCAA's longstanding amateurism rules, which apply to college athletes and no one else in America, the lion's share of that money will flow from the former group to the latter. From the jerseys to the suits.<br /><br />From black to white.<br /><br />"You have two sets of legal rules that treat two different classifications of people differently, and it's unjustified," Amy McCormick says. "I would never say college sports are as bad as a system where people are jailed and killed, but it's an Apartheid system."<br /><br />In 2010, Amy and Robert co-authored a law journal article titled "Major College Sports: A Modern Apartheid<i>,</i>"<i> </i>arguing that revenue-producing campus football and men's basketball hold black athletes in "legal servitude for the profit and entertainment" of whites. "These are sharp words," they wrote, "but the facts are indisputable."<br /><br />Others agree. Sports agent Don Yee, whose firm represents NFL players including New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady and retired linebacker Dhani Jones, calls<a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/01/08/college-sports-exploits-unpaid-black-athletes-but-they-could-force-a-change/"> </a><a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/01/08/college-sports-exploits-unpaid-black-athletes-but-they-could-force-a-change/">the NCAA's refusal to pay athletes a racial injustice.</a> Nobel Prize-winning economist Gary Becker<a href="http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2011/04/the-ncaa-as-a-powerful-cartel-becker.html"> </a><a href="http://www.becker-posner-blog.com/2011/04/the-ncaa-as-a-powerful-cartel-becker.html">described campus amateurism as a regressive wealth transfer</a> from mostly poor African-American athletes and their families to mostly well-off white managers, non-revenue sport athletes and their families. Pulitzer Prize-winning civil rights historian Taylor Branch has written that Division I revenue sports exude "an unmistakable whiff of the plantation," while former NCAA executive director Walter Byers—a man who ran the organization for decades and essentially built modern college sports as we know them—wrote in his<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Unsportsmanlike-Conduct-Exploiting-College-Athletes/dp/0472084429"> </a><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Unsportsmanlike-Conduct-Exploiting-College-Athletes/dp/0472084429">Road to Damascus memoir</a> that his creation was suffused with a "neo-plantation mentality" in which the economic rewards "belong to the overseers," with "what trickles down after that" going to young men such as Rogers.<br /><br />It's not hard to see what's happening, the McCormicks say. You just have to look.<br /><br />"One group is predominantly white, the other is predominantly black, and only one has the power and writes the rules for its benefit," Robert says. "I was a big Michigan State fan for a long time before we wrote our first article, and it's kind of embarrassing it came so late in my life. But once you see it, you can't unsee it."<br /><hr /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="831px" data-original-width="1248px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459783472.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">From right to left: Kansas State president Kirk Schultz, NCAA president Mark Emmert and South Carolina president Harris Pastides speak during a 2015 Final Four press conference. Photo by Robert Deutsch-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><b>Understand this: there's nothing inherently racist about amateurism itself.</b> And there's no reason to believe that its defenders and proponents—including current NCAA president Mark Emmert—are motivated by racial animus. When amateurism was fashioned out of whole cloth by Victorian-era English aristocrats, its ethos was strictly classist: snobby upper-class rowers didn't want to compete against unwashed bricklayers and factory workers, and concocting an ersatz Greek athletic ideal of no-pay-for-play provided convenient justification. Likewise, the American colleges that copied their English counterparts at the dawn of the 20th century weren't looking to plunder African-American athletic labor—not when their sports and campuses, like society at large, were still segregated.<br /><br />Today, the economic exploitation within college sports remains race-neutral on its face. The association's strict prohibition on campus athletes receiving any compensation beyond the price-fixed value of their athletic scholarships applies equally to players of every color. White former Texas A&amp;M University quarterback Johnny Manziel couldn't cash in on his market value any more than black former Auburn University quarterback Cam Newton could. When black former Vanderbilt University center Festus Ezeli was suspended in 2011 for accepting a meal and a hotel room from a school alumnus, it wasn't any different than when white former University of Nebraska quarterback Eric Crouch was suspended eleven years earlier for accepting a plane ride and a ham sandwich from a candidate for the school's board of regents.<br /><br />And yet, while the NCAA's intent is color-blind, the impact of amateurism is anything but. In American law, there is a concept called <i>adverse impact</i>, in which, essentially, some facially neutral rules that have an unjustified adverse impact on a particular group can be challenged as discriminatory. For instance, the Supreme Court ruled in a landmark 1971 case that a North Carolina power company could no longer require prospective employees to have a high school diploma and pass two intelligence tests—a screening process that didn't relate to job performance but did have the effect of excluding high numbers of African-American applicants at a workplace that already was highly segregated. Similarly, sociologists speak of <i>structural racism </i>when analyzing public policies that have a disproportionately negative impact on minority individuals, families, and communities. State lottery systems that essentially move money from predominantly lower-class African-American ticket buyers to predominantly middle-and-upper-class white school districts<a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2504879"> </a><a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2504879">fit the bill</a>; so does<a href="http://https//www.aclu.org/drug-war-new-jim-crow"> </a><a href="http://https//www.aclu.org/drug-war-new-jim-crow">a War on Drugs that disproportionately incarcerates young black men</a>; so does a recent decision by officials in Maricopa County, Arizona, to<a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/arizonas-voting-rights-fire-bell/2016/03/27/f184e856-f2c0-11e5-85a6-2132cf446d0a_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-a%253Ahomepage%252Fstory"> </a><a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/arizonas-voting-rights-fire-bell/2016/03/27/f184e856-f2c0-11e5-85a6-2132cf446d0a_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-a%253Ahomepage%252Fstory">drastically cut the number of presidential primary polling stations in and around Phoenix</a>, which unnecessarily made voting far more difficult for the residents of a non-white majority city.<br /><br />Big-time college sports fall under the same conceptual umbrella. Amateurism rules restrain campus athletes—and only campus athletes, not campus musicians or campus writers—from earning a free-market income, accepting whatever money, goods, or services someone else wants to give them. And guess what? In the revenue sports of Division I football and men's basketball, where most of the fan interest and television dollars are, the athletes are disproportionately black.<br /><br /><a href="http://web1.ncaa.org/rgdSearch/exec/main">According to the NCAA</a>, 58.3 percent of Division I basketball players and 47.1 percent of Division I football players in 2014-15 were black, making them the largest racial group in both sports. Focus on the Power Five conferences that gobble up most of Division I's broadcast revenues, and the picture largely looks the same—black participation percentages are a bit lower in the Big Ten and Pac-12, and the same or higher in the others:<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="256px" data-original-width="614px" height="265" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459783756.jpg?output-quality=75" width="640" /></div><br />African-Americans also make up a disproportionate share of the very best, most valuable athletes in college sports—that is, the prep recruits ranked the highest coming onto campus, and the departing players most coveted by the NFL and the National Basketball Association. The McCormicks found that 82 percent of the top 250 high school football seniors and 88 percent of the top 150 high school basketball seniors in 2010 were black. Don Yee, the sports agent, calculates that in recent NFL drafts, five times as many black players were taken in the first two rounds than white players. In the last five NBA drafts, 84 percent of the top 10 selections who played college basketball were black.<br /><br />According to the U.S. Census, blacks made up 12.3 percent of the nation's total population in 2012. Meanwhile,<a href="http://www.gse.upenn.edu/equity/sites/gse.upenn.edu.equity/files/publications/Harper_Sports_2016.pdf"> </a><a href="http://www.gse.upenn.edu/equity/sites/gse.upenn.edu.equity/files/publications/Harper_Sports_2016.pdf">a 2016 study by the University of Pennsylvania's Center for the Study of Race and Equity in Education</a><u> </u>found that black men made up only 2.5 percent of the overall student population at the schools in the five biggest Division I conferences. In other words, African-Americans aren't just overrepresented in big-time college sports; they're <i>wildly </i>overrepresented.<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="1571px" data-original-width="1350px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459787341.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">2016 high school basketball All-Americans De'Aaron Fox (5), Malik Monk (5) Bam Adebayo (13), and Sacha Killeya-Jones (1) will all be attending the University of Kentucky. Photo by Brian Spurlock-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><br />This does not hold true, however, when it comes to positions of power. The head of the NCAA always has been a white man, and none of the Power Five conferences has ever had a non-white commissioner. A<a href="http://nebula.wsimg.com/981af17829f7a5a304eaa2160bfeb884?AccessKeyId=DAC3A56D8FB782449D2A&amp;disposition=0&amp;alloworigin=1"> 2015 study by the University of Central Florida's Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport</a> of the 128 Football Bowl Subdivision schools—most of the major college sports money-makers—and<a href="http://https//www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Final%252B2012%252BCollege%252BRGRC.pdfhttp://nebula.wsimg.com/308fbfef97c47edb705ff195306a2d50?AccessKeyId=DAC3A56D8FB782449D2A&amp;disposition=0&amp;alloworigin=1"> </a><a href="http://https//www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/Final%252B2012%252BCollege%252BRGRC.pdfhttp://nebula.wsimg.com/308fbfef97c47edb705ff195306a2d50?AccessKeyId=DAC3A56D8FB782449D2A&amp;disposition=0&amp;alloworigin=1">a second UCF study of campus athletics as a whole</a> found that industry decision-makers were overwhelmingly white:<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="663px" data-original-width="437px" height="640" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459796052.jpg?output-quality=75" width="421" /></div><br />The white majority leadership of college sports has a long history of acting in its own economic self-interest when it comes to the rights of black athletes. Consider basic participation: in the 1930s and 1940s, Northern teams typically benched their African-American players in order to participate in profitable Southern bowl games—Boston College twice benched Lou Montgomery to play in the Cotton and Sugar Bowls—while in the 1960s and 1970s, Southern teams integrated their football squads because failing to do so was competitive (and financial) suicide. Does the current amateurism status quo reflect more of the same? It's hard not to wonder.<br /><br />"You could argue that the system is not failing us, that it is doing exactly what it is intended to do, " says Eddie Comeaux, an associate professor of higher education at the University of California, Riverside who has studied race, diversity, and structural inequality in college sports, and once played Division I baseball at the University of California, Berkeley. "Think of the stakeholders. The coaches, presidents, the people in positions of privilege and power—namely, white men—all benefit handsomely from this enterprise."<br /><hr /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="929px" data-original-width="1394px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459784238.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Virginia Commonwealth guard Korey Billbury celebrates into a television camera after scoring a basket in 2015. Photo by Geoff Burke-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><b>Now follow the money.</b> The NCAA takes in roughly $700 million annually from CBS, Turner, and ESPN for the broadcast rights to March Madness—a sum that<a href="http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/other-sports/the-scene/2014/04/03/inside-the-final-four-finances-the-march-toward-1-billion-in-revenue"> </a><a href="http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/other-sports/the-scene/2014/04/03/inside-the-final-four-finances-the-march-toward-1-billion-in-revenue">reportedly will jump</a> to nearly $900 million per year from 2019 to 2024. ESPN<a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324851704578133223970790516"> </a><a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324851704578133223970790516">is paying $7.3 billion over 12 years</a> to televise the College Football Playoff and four other bowl games—about $470 million annually, or roughly $67 million <i>per contest</i>. Major football conferences are collecting hundreds of millions more through their own television deals and networks—<a href="http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2015/05/sec_schools_to_each_reportedly.html">the SEC made a NCAA record $455.8 million in 2014-15</a>—and Yee says college sports merchandising and licensing revenue exceeds $4 billion annually.<br /><br />According to <i>Institutional Investor</i>, the 124 schools with major football teams <a href="http://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/3542437/banking-and-capital-markets-corporations/final-four-bonanza-is-just-a-taste-of-college-athletics-riches.html">brought in a combined $8.2 billion in athletic revenue in 2014</a>, double what they made a decade earlier. Dan Rascher, a San Francisco-based economist and expert witness for the former athlete plaintiffs in the recent <i>O'Bannon v. NCAA </i>federal antitrust trial, estimates that Division I football and men's basketball generate between $10 billion and $12 billion in yearly revenue.<br /><br />No matter how you measure it, that's a lot of cash. Where does it go? Mostly not to the predominantly black athletes who play the games. NCAA rules restrict player compensation to athletic scholarships, small cost-of-living stipends—worth roughly $2,000-$5,000 per semester—and association hardship funds for things such as travel for family medical emergencies. (Oh, and athletes are also allowed to keep up to $1,350 worth of bowl game swag bags and gifts, like the XBox One video game consoles handed out at the Military Bowl.) The result, Rascher says, is that Division I college football and men's basketball players only receive about 10 percent of the total revenue they help generate.<br /><br />The rest largely ends up in white pockets. Outside of the athletes, compensation levels across major campus sports are astronomical. Williams and Wright, the coaches in tonight's men's basketball championship game,<a href="http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/mens-basketball/coach/"> </a><a href="http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/mens-basketball/coach/">earn $2 million and $2.5 million a year</a>, <a href="http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/mens-basketball/coach/">respectively</a>. NCAA president Emmert<a href="http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25229481/inside-college-sports-mark-emmerts-pay-ncaa-legal-fees-increase"> </a><a href="http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25229481/inside-college-sports-mark-emmerts-pay-ncaa-legal-fees-increase">was paid $1.8 million in 2013</a>. The five power conference commissioners, all white men, earned<a href="http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25229481/inside-college-sports-mark-emmerts-pay-ncaa-legal-fees-increase"> </a><a href="http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/25229481/inside-college-sports-mark-emmerts-pay-ncaa-legal-fees-increase">between $2.1 million and $3.5 million</a> the same year. University of Alabama football coach Nick Saban, who won the college football championship earlier this year,<a href="http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/10/08/highest-paid-college-football-coaches-salaries-list-nick-saban-jim-harbaugh"> </a><a href="http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/10/08/highest-paid-college-football-coaches-salaries-list-nick-saban-jim-harbaugh">makes about $7 million annually</a>; his program's <i>strength coach </i>(who is also white)<a href="http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/page/scontheroadncf12302015/alabama-crimson-tide-strength-coach-scott-cochran-nick-saban-secret-weapon"><i> </i></a><a href="http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/page/scontheroadncf12302015/alabama-crimson-tide-strength-coach-scott-cochran-nick-saban-secret-weapon">reportedly makes over $600,000.</a> Clemson University football coach Dabo Swinney was the lowest-paid College Football Playoff coach at $3.3 million per year, and<a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/sports/as-college-sports-revenues-spike-coaches-arent-only-ones-cashing-in/2015/12/29/bbdb924e-ae15-11e5-9ab0-884d1cc4b33e_story.html"> </a><a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/sports/as-college-sports-revenues-spike-coaches-arent-only-ones-cashing-in/2015/12/29/bbdb924e-ae15-11e5-9ab0-884d1cc4b33e_story.html">has a "chief of staff" who makes only $252,000</a>.<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="2170px" data-original-width="1454px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459785187.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Alabama football coach Nick Saban is paid about $7 million per year. Photo by Butch Dill-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table>According to <i>USA Today,</i> nine campus athletic directors in 2013<a href="http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/all/director"> </a><a href="http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/all/director">were paid more than $1 million a year</a>, and the average salary for the position at FBS schools was<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/03/06/college-athletics-directors-salaries-increase/1964239/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/03/06/college-athletics-directors-salaries-increase/1964239/">roughly $515,000.</a> Average base pay for head football coaches at the same universities<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/10/08/coaches-bonuses-gary-pinkel/73553784/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaaf/2015/10/08/coaches-bonuses-gary-pinkel/73553784/">exceeds $2 million,</a> while 37 of the 68 head coaches in this year's NCAA men's basketball tournament<a href="http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/mens-basketball/coach/"> </a><a href="http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/mens-basketball/coach/">made more than $1 million annually</a>. Yee notes that bowl game directors can make nearly $1 million for administering a single game. There are other job perks, too. The <i>Washington Post</i> reports that the<a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/good-to-be-commish-salaries-for-power-five-conference-bosses-soar/2016/01/08/8b5dfe1c-b569-11e5-a76a-0b5145e8679a_story.html"> </a><a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/good-to-be-commish-salaries-for-power-five-conference-bosses-soar/2016/01/08/8b5dfe1c-b569-11e5-a76a-0b5145e8679a_story.html">Pac-12 gave commissioner Larry Scott an interest-free, $1.86 million loan</a><u> </u>to buy a four-bedroom, four-bathroom, wine bar-equipped 4,600-square-foot home in 2009. Expense report documents viewed by VICE Sports show that former University of Washington football coach Steve Sarkisian, <a href="http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/uw-huskies/washington-extends-coach-steve-sarkisians-contract-through-2015/">who made about $2 million a year in salary</a>, was also given football and basketball tickets in 2011-12 valued at almost $19,000, all while the school leased his wife a $55,000 sport-utility vehicle.<br /><br />Then there are non-revenue sport athletes: swimmers and rowers, golfers and cross-country runners, tennis and lacrosse players, most of them supported and subsidized by the profits from big-time football and men's basketball. Like the people in charge of college sports,<a href="http://web1.ncaa.org/rgdSearch/exec/saSearch"> </a><a href="http://web1.ncaa.org/rgdSearch/exec/saSearch">NCAA statistics</a> indicate that this group is primarily white:<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><img data-original-height="461px" data-original-width="373px" height="400" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459785325.jpg?output-quality=75" width="323" /></div><br />This matters, too. <a href="http://fortune.com/2016/04/02/ncaa-athletes-funding/">As</a><a href="http://fortune.com/2016/04/02/ncaa-athletes-funding/"><i> Fortune </i></a><a href="http://fortune.com/2016/04/02/ncaa-athletes-funding/">points out</a>, U.S. Census data indicates that African-American households make around $35,000 a year, about 35 percent less than the average white household. Meanwhile, the<a href="http://www.aspenprojectplay.org/the-facts"> </a><a href="http://www.aspenprojectplay.org/the-facts">Aspen Institute's Project Play reports</a> that the poorer the family, the less access their children typically have to the increasingly expensive youth sport feeder system that stocks the rosters of these non-revenue sports. The result? Black athletes paying the freight for white ones, even though the former group is more likely to need the money than the latter. "The idea that you rob the poor to pay the rich is what's happening," says Renae Steiner, a Minneapolis-based antitrust lawyer who worked on the <i>O'Bannon </i>case. "The [college] lacrosse team gets no revenue. Well, who plays lacrosse?"<br /><br />Add it all up, and this is the amateurism-enabled wealth transfer that Nobel Prize-winning economist Becker and others have diagnosed, the one the McCormicks can't unsee. Just how much money is being extracted from black athletes and their families by the major college sports industry? Let's do some back-of-the-envelope math. In the NFL and NBA—where football and basketball players are free to unionize and collectively bargain with their employers—athletes receive about half of total league revenues. In major college sports, it's 10 percent. Bump that up to a pro-level 50 percent, and that's an extra $4 billion annually for all revenue sport athletes.<br /><br />Since African-Americans make up about 53 percent of football and basketball players put together, that means they're losing about <i>$2.2 billion, </i>each and every year.<br /><br />Of course, that's a rough guess, and one that lumps both sports and every Division I conference and school together. In 2011, the National College Players Association, a college athlete advocacy group, and Drexel University professor Ellen Staurowsky<a href="http://www.ncpanow.org/research/body/The-Price-of-Poverty-in-Big-Time-College-Sport.pdf"> </a><a href="http://www.ncpanow.org/research/body/The-Price-of-Poverty-in-Big-Time-College-Sport.pdf">published a study</a> estimating that if FBS football and basketball players received the same percentage of industry revenues as their professional counterparts, the average football player would be worth $121,048 per season, and that the average basketball player would be worth $265,027. For the very best athletes at the biggest, most lucrative college programs, those numbers could be even higher: the average University of Texas football player would be worth $514,000 a season, while the average Duke University basketball player would be worth $1 million.<br /><br />Keep in mind, those numbers were based on college sports revenues in 2010-11; given the subsequent influx of additional television money, those estimates would be even higher today. Moreover, Staurowsky's estimates don't take into account any potential outside athletic income—like athletes signing autographs for cash, or starring in commercials for local car dealers, or getting paid for wearing Nike hightops instead of seeing coaches and administrators<a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/blog/threads_and_laces/2013/09/how-nike-funnels-money-football-coaches.html"> pocket money</a> for <a href="http://www.bizjournals.com/portland/blog/threads_and_laces/2013/08/five-surprises-ncaa-nike-adidas-contract.html?page=all">wearing branded shoes during golf outings with donors, and sticking the company's swoosh logo on equipment trucks</a>. Nevertheless, they help show what amateurism costs the average African-American major college football or basketball player: somewhere between $500,000 to $1 million over a four-season campus career, a tidy sum that those same athletes will never, ever get back.<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="1562px" data-original-width="1312px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459786302.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">North Carolina players Joel James (42), Isaiah Hicks (4), and Kenny Williams (24) during the 2016 Final Four. Photo by Robert Deutsch-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><br />A well-known NCAA television advertising campaign claims that "there are 400,000 NCAA student-athletes, and almost all of them will go pro in something other than sports."<a href="http://https//www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/01/27/college-athletes-greatly-overestimate-their-chances-playing-professionally"> </a><a href="http://https//www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/01/27/college-athletes-greatly-overestimate-their-chances-playing-professionally">This is true.</a> Only 1.2 percent of college basketball players are drafted by the NBA; just 1.6 percent of college football players reach the NFL. So for the vast majority of those revenue-sport athletes, the four years they spend starring on ESPN's Big Monday or in the Battlefrog Fiesta Bowl are the prime earning years of their athletic lives, and likely of their lives in general—in 2010, the percentage of American households with adjusted gross incomes of over $500,000 a year was<a href="http://taxfoundation.org/blog/monday-map-percentage-taxpayers-agi-over-500000"> </a><a href="http://taxfoundation.org/blog/monday-map-percentage-taxpayers-agi-over-500000">less than one percent in 49 of 50 states.</a><br /><br />"Several black athletes have told me how even when they get a [cost-of-living] stipend, they have to send it back home to help family out," says Billy Hawkins, a University of Georgia professor who studies the sociology of sports and is the author of <i>The New Plantation: Black Athletes and College Athletics.</i> "Whereas the majority of white athletes coming from middle class families don't have those same responsibilities. So even if and when white athletes are experiencing economic exploitation, it can still be a disproportionate impact."<br /><br />When African-American former Northwestern University quarterback Kain Colter led a high-profile push to unionize his school's football team in 2014, he did so for a number of reasons: deep misgivings over the power imbalance between NCAA schools and athletes; a lack of financial support for players, especially ones from poorer families; a pattern of steering athletes away from useful and demanding courses of study, the better to keep them eligible for sports; and a system that didn't seem to do enough to protect football players from brain trauma, nor provide medical coverage for athletes whose campus injuries can afflict them for life.<br /><br />According the book <i>Indentured: The Inside Story of the Rebellion Against the NCAA</i>, Colter also had a personal motivation for demanding change: the story of his uncle, Cleveland, a former football star at the University of Southern California.<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="1500px" data-original-width="1053px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459786574.jpg?output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Northwestern football coach Pat Fitzgerald congratulates quarterback Kain Colter after a 2013 touchdown. Photo by Bruce Thorson-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table>Cleveland Colter was supposed to be one of the athletic one-percenters. As <i>Indentured</i> reports, he went from top high school recruit to All-American safety, and was considered the best athlete on a Trojans defense that also featured future NFL stars Junior Seau and Mark Carrier. However, a debilitating knee injury his senior year derailed his professional prospects. Years of investing his time and sweat into a sport, and he wouldn't have a cent to show for it. Today,<a href="http://archive.azcentral.com/sports/preps/se/articles/2009/09/02/20090902spt-whatup.html"> </a><a href="http://archive.azcentral.com/sports/preps/se/articles/2009/09/02/20090902spt-whatup.html">he runs a school lunch catering business.</a> Imagine what an extra $500,000 would have meant to him, and how it might have changed his life. Imagine what that it would mean to any black revenue sport athlete. That's money to start a business. Buy a home or a rental property. Pay for a child's education. Take care of a sick relative. Stick into a stock market index fund, ignore for 40 years, and then retire with peace of mind. Imagine black athletes building lasting wealth for themselves and their communities—in 2013, <a href="http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/12/12/racial-wealth-gaps-great-recession/">the median net worth of white American households was $141,900</a>, while the same figure for African-American households was just $11,000—instead of watching powerful white people do the same.<br /><br />"They've imposed a tax on football and basketball players," says Sonny Vaccaro, the longtime shoe company dealmaker who helped spearhead the <i>O'Bannon</i> lawsuit and has become one of the NCAA's most vocal critics. "That's what it is. A tax. Like what the British put on the Americans. They take the money that could be pouring back into those player's lives. The money comes from mostly one segment of society: African Americans.<br /><br />"It is <i>Downton Abbey</i>. We just won't accept it."<br /><hr /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="1454px" data-original-width="2181px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459787151.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott addresses the media during the conference's 2016 postseason basketball tournament in Las Vegas. Photo by Kyle Terada-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><b>Hold up.</b> Aren't African-American football and men's basketball players receiving something of immense value from the NCAA system? Aren't they getting a college education—and a debt-free education, to boot?<br /><br />Isn't that a fair and just exchange?<br /><br />A few days before the Final Four, Pac-12 commissioner Scott, a white man<a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/good-to-be-commish-salaries-for-power-five-conference-bosses-soar/2016/01/08/8b5dfe1c-b569-11e5-a76a-0b5145e8679a_story.html"> </a><a href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/good-to-be-commish-salaries-for-power-five-conference-bosses-soar/2016/01/08/8b5dfe1c-b569-11e5-a76a-0b5145e8679a_story.html">who made $3.4 million in 2014</a>, and Big East commissioner Val Ackerman, a white woman whose salary is unreported—her predecessors in the job<a href="http://https//wvthings.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/commiss-salaries.pdf"> </a><a href="http://https//wvthings.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/commiss-salaries.pdf">reportedly made around $500,000 annually</a>—<a href="http://www.cnn.com/2016/03/30/opinions/college-athletes-not-exploited-ackerman-scott/index.html?platform=hootsuite">co-published an editorial on</a><a href="http://cnn.com/"> CNN.com</a> arguing as much. Under a headline reading "College Athletes Are Educated, Not Exploited," they claimed that 67 percent of all Division I athletes will go on to become college graduates—a slightly higher graduation rate than that of non-athletes—and that campus athletes receive something even more important than a degree: namely, "they're taught how to be successful in college and in life."<br /><br />For black athletes, however, this is too often not the case. Already disproportionately shut out of an economy they power through sweat, blood, and concussions, they disproportionately receive substandard educations as well.<br /><br />Seventeen years ago, a NCAA report examining Division I athletes who enrolled in school in 1992-93 found that just 42 percent of black football players and 33 percent of black basketball players had graduated after six years—far below a 54 percent graduation rate for male students in general. Today, the situation has improved, but not by much. In 2012, a<a href="http://https//www.gse.upenn.edu/equity/sites/gse.upenn.edu.equity/files/publications/Harper_Williams_and_Blackman_%25282013%2529.pdf"> University of Pennsylvania study</a> reported that the six-year graduation rate for black male college athletes in six major Division I conferences was 50.2 percent, less than comparable graduation rates for all students (72.8 percent), all college athletes (66.9 percent), and all African-American male students (55.5 percent). In 2016, <a href="http://www.gse.upenn.edu/equity/sites/gse.upenn.edu.equity/files/publications/Harper_Sports_2016.pdf">an update</a> found that the black male graduation rate had slightly improved to 53.6 percent. Also this year,<a href="http://nebula.wsimg.com/6729bb35e3e2f1396de38f374d302a86?AccessKeyId=DAC3A56D8FB782449D2A&amp;disposition=0&amp;alloworigin=1"> </a><a href="http://nebula.wsimg.com/6729bb35e3e2f1396de38f374d302a86?AccessKeyId=DAC3A56D8FB782449D2A&amp;disposition=0&amp;alloworigin=1">a UCF study</a><u> </u>found that the NCAA's graduation success rate—another six-year measure that accounts for school transfers—for black men's basketball players on this year's 68 NCAA Tournament teams was 75 percent, 18 points lower than the rate for white players. (The graduation rate for black football players on 2014-15 bowl teams<a href="http://nebula.wsimg.com/f644dbcde02eeb785f7dc4a848fb5749?AccessKeyId=DAC3A56D8FB782449D2A&amp;disposition=0&amp;alloworigin=1"> </a><a href="http://nebula.wsimg.com/f644dbcde02eeb785f7dc4a848fb5749?AccessKeyId=DAC3A56D8FB782449D2A&amp;disposition=0&amp;alloworigin=1">was 66 percent</a>, 19 percent lower than the rate for white players).<br /><br />"Disproportionately, they are not graduating," Comeaux, the UC Riverside professor, says. "It's largely based on a notion that it's not a priority, that classes are just there to maintain eligibility so they can participate in sports."<br /><br />Indeed, graduation rates don't tell the whole story. In his research, Comeaux has found that engagement with faculty is crucial for academic achievement, yet professors tend to spend much more out-of-class time with white male athletes than black ones. Furthermore, athletes frequently find themselves choosing (or steered into) undemanding majors, which is hardly surprising given that playing big-time college football or basketball is a year-round, high-pressure, physically taxing, 40-60 hour-a-week job with frequent and irregular travel demands. African-American former Duke basketball player Shane Battier, an excellent student,<a href="http://https//books.google.com/books?id=4EJC0IpPf58C&amp;pg=PT218&amp;lpg=PT218&amp;dq=shane+battier+religion+major+basketball+practice&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=WklZYxHD22&amp;sig=5vD8kACdOH9zWk4gcrKJjGmcsTU&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiO-LrV6vPLAhVCUhQKHQZWC2gQ6AEIUTAJ#v=onepage&amp;q=shane%2520battier%2520religion%2520major%2520basketball%2520practice&amp;f=false"> </a><a href="http://https//books.google.com/books?id=4EJC0IpPf58C&amp;pg=PT218&amp;lpg=PT218&amp;dq=shane+battier+religion+major+basketball+practice&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=WklZYxHD22&amp;sig=5vD8kACdOH9zWk4gcrKJjGmcsTU&amp;hl=en&amp;sa=X&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiO-LrV6vPLAhVCUhQKHQZWC2gQ6AEIUTAJ#v=onepage&amp;q=shane%2520battier%2520religion%2520major%2520basketball%2520practice&amp;f=false">majored in religion</a> because it didn't conflict with his basketball schedule. Kain Colter started at Northwestern as a premed student, but switched his major to psychology after football practice forced him to miss too many science classes. In 1991, African-American former Ohio State University running back Robert Smith, an aspiring doctor,<a href="http://articles.philly.com/1991-09-10/sports/25803083_1_elliot-uzelac-robert-smith-football-program"> </a><a href="http://articles.philly.com/1991-09-10/sports/25803083_1_elliot-uzelac-robert-smith-football-program">quit the school's football team for a year</a> and instead ran track after accusing coaches of not taking his academic responsibilities seriously.<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="1666px" data-original-width="1234px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459787597.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Syracuse's Malachi Richardson drives to the basket against North Carolina's Justin Jackson during the Final Four. None of the current players on either team has been implicated in any academic scandals. Photo by Bob Donnan-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table>This year's Final Four featured two schools, Syracuse and North Carolina, whose basketball programs were recently involved in academic scandals.<a href="http://https//www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/03/09/ncaa-suspends-syracuse-u-basketball-coach-vacates-108-wins"> </a><a href="http://https//www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/03/09/ncaa-suspends-syracuse-u-basketball-coach-vacates-108-wins">A NCAA investigation</a> found that Syracuse's athletic staff members accessed the email accounts of several athletes, communicated directly with faculty members while pretending to be those athletes, and also did school work for them; most notably, the Orange's former director of basketball operations helped former Big East Defensive Player of the Year Fab Melo remain eligible<a href="http://www.syracuse.com/orangesports/index.ssf/2015/03/syracuse_basketball_ncaa_investigation_how_far_did_school_go_keep_fab_melo_eligible.html"> </a><a href="http://www.syracuse.com/orangesports/index.ssf/2015/03/syracuse_basketball_ncaa_investigation_how_far_did_school_go_keep_fab_melo_eligible.html">by completing one of his paper</a>s. Meanwhile, malfeasance at North Carolina was far more widespread: school employees steered 1,500 athletes over 18 years toward no-show "paper classes" in the school's Department of African and Afro-American Studies that never actually met and only required students to hand in a single research paper. African-American former Tar Heels basketball player Rashard McCants, a member of the school's 2005 national championship team,<a href="http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/11036924/former-north-carolina-basketball-star-rashad-mccants-says-took-sham-classes"> </a><a href="http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/11036924/former-north-carolina-basketball-star-rashad-mccants-says-took-sham-classes">told ESPN</a> that he even made the dean's list in the spring of 2005—despite not attending any of the four classes for which he received straight A's. Last year, McCants' sister Rashanda, a former North Carolina basketball player, and African-American former UNC football player Devon Ramsay filed a federal class action lawsuit against the school, alleging that athletes were harmed by the paper class scheme—<a href="http://www.newsobserver.com/news/local/education/unc-scandal/article10229933.html#storylink=cpy">a practice that lead plaintiff's lawyer Michael Hausfeld said</a> "was nothing more than an integral, foreseeable part of the entire enterprise of big-time contemporary college athletics, in which academics is truly the stepchild to athletics, and the meaningful education that the NCAA promises and commits to is nothing more than an illusion."<br /><br />McCants' case is extreme. But are second-rate athlete educations all that uncommon? Eight years ago, <i>USA Today</i><a href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:qz5GT36FIVMJ:usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/2008-11-18-majors-cover_N.htm&amp;num=1&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=us&amp;strip=1&amp;vwsrc=0"> </a><a href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:qz5GT36FIVMJ:usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/college/2008-11-18-majors-cover_N.htm&amp;num=1&amp;hl=en&amp;gl=us&amp;strip=1&amp;vwsrc=0">investigated the phenomenon</a> of academic "clustering"—that is, large numbers of athletes taking particular majors at much higher rates than the general student body, possibly (or presumably) because those majors are less demanding and will help them remain eligible—and determined that it was commonplace at big-time sports schools.<a href="http://www.csri-jiia.org/documents/publications/research_articles/2009/JIIA_2009_1_Fountain_Publish%2520Copy_1.0.pdf"> </a><a href="http://www.csri-jiia.org/documents/publications/research_articles/2009/JIIA_2009_1_Fountain_Publish%2520Copy_1.0.pdf">A 2009 study</a> of clustering in ACC football found that black players were more likely to cluster than their white counterparts, and that at six schools, over 75 percent of the black players were enrolled in one of two majors.<br /><br />"Graduation doesn't equal education," says Hawkins, the University of Georgia professor. "That's one of the things I've always been critical of. I've been on this campus 20 years. We can graduate athletes. But what's the quality of that education, and does it lead to gainful employment in fields that are comparable to what they've studied? We've studied football players 10 years out and we find that's not the case. Players are working in fields that are sort of beneath their degree. I think that's a pattern."<br /><hr /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-d71cx5k_Xr0/Vwlzr-M9wWI/AAAAAAAADRI/EuAMC1YIB14tY0IcWHxARzeQ4pR2OMGgw/s1600/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459787841.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-d71cx5k_Xr0/Vwlzr-M9wWI/AAAAAAAADRI/EuAMC1YIB14tY0IcWHxARzeQ4pR2OMGgw/s1600/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459787841.jpg" /></a></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Northwestern quarterback Kain Colter during a 2013 game. Photo by David Banks-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><b>On the first night of the NCAA tournament's Sweet Sixteen</b>—around the same time Villanova tipped off against the University of Miami, Florida—sociologist and longtime civil rights advocate Harry Edwards stood behind a podium at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia, addressing a college athletes' rights conference.<br /><br />"Let's be honest and straight up," he said. "When we talk about football and basketball, we are talking about the black athlete."<br /><br />In the early 1960s, Edwards had been one of those athletes himself, a basketball player and record-setting discus thrower at San Jose State. Looking around, he saw a campus that was mostly white—students, faculty, administrators, curriculum; everything save its sports stars—and an athletic department that was defined by its "willingness to exploit black athletic talent."<a href="http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/bic1/ReferenceDetailsPage/ReferenceDetailsWindow?displayGroupName=Reference&amp;disableHighlighting=false&amp;prodId=BIC1&amp;action=e&amp;windowstate=normal&amp;catId=&amp;documentId=GALE%257CK1618000912&amp;mode=view&amp;userGroupName=fairfax_main&amp;jsid=c47d6eabaa72aa6aa1fdeca60c71f2ac"> </a><a href="http://ic.galegroup.com/ic/bic1/ReferenceDetailsPage/ReferenceDetailsWindow?displayGroupName=Reference&amp;disableHighlighting=false&amp;prodId=BIC1&amp;action=e&amp;windowstate=normal&amp;catId=&amp;documentId=GALE%257CK1618000912&amp;mode=view&amp;userGroupName=fairfax_main&amp;jsid=c47d6eabaa72aa6aa1fdeca60c71f2ac">He saw white athletes</a> "get [summer] jobs that black starters didn't get," and "tours to places that black athletes didn't even know were being given." After returning to the school as a part-time instructor, Edwards<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/1988/05/22/magazine/an-outsider-joins-the-team.html?pagewanted=all"> </a><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/1988/05/22/magazine/an-outsider-joins-the-team.html?pagewanted=all">presented a list of civil rights grievances</a> to San Jose State's leadership on behalf of the school's black students and athletes; the group included black football players, threatened to sit out the first game of the 1967 season if their demands—including more black students and professors, equal access to student housing, and desegregated fraternities and sororities—weren't met. (Shortly thereafter, Edwards would become famous for attempting to organize an African-American athlete boycott of the 1968 Summer Olympics, an effort that inspired John Carlos and Tommie Smith's seminal black power salute on the medal stand in Mexico City.)<br /><br />"Why should we play where we can't work?" Edwards said, recalling that San Jose State cancelled the game. (The cancellation prompted a war of words with then-California governor Ronald Reagan, who called Edwards "a criminal, unfit to teach." Edwards dubbed the future president "a petrified pig, unfit to govern.") "People thought that question was insane at the time," Edwards continued, adding that the school's athletics and campus sports in general could be characterized as "a plantation structure."<br /><br />"Fifty years later, that statement can still be made," he said. "It has not changed."<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="1388px" data-original-width="1610px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459788089.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Northwestern football players Chi Chi Ariguzo (left) and Traveon Henry on the campus in 2014 to vote on whether to unionize. Photo by David Banks-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table><br />Most of the people who currently run college athletics would disagree. Vehemently. The entire enterprise can't possibly be unjust, let alone racially unjust. Not when athletes—including African-American athletes—are given so much. Small cash stipends.<a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/81801184/why-schools-suddenly-support-four-year-scholarships-for-college-athletes"> </a><a href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/81801184/why-schools-suddenly-support-four-year-scholarships-for-college-athletes">Four-year scholarships.</a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/04/26/unlimited-food-snacks-wisconsin-oregon-ncaa-student-athletes/26405105/"> </a><a href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2015/04/26/unlimited-food-snacks-wisconsin-oregon-ncaa-student-athletes/26405105/">Unlimited snacks.</a> Access to world-class coaching and palatial training facilities. Athletes get to play exciting games before large crowds of adoring fans; they get academic tutors to help them learn, and to<a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/ca/article/vice-sports-qa-billion-dollar-ball-author-gil-gaul"> </a><a href="http://https//sports.vice.com/ca/article/vice-sports-qa-billion-dollar-ball-author-gil-gaul">literally walk them to and from class</a>. Exploited? If anything, they should feel grateful—and not like the former players suing the NCAA in federal antitrust court, whom Texas women's athletic director Chris Plonsky, a white woman who makes roughly $500,000 a year, says are entitled malcontents who<a href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/6/17/5818472/texas-womens-ad-entitled-players"> </a><a href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/6/17/5818472/texas-womens-ad-entitled-players">"sucked a whole lot off the college athletics pipe."</a><br /><br />Except: the injustice in college sports isn't just about the terms of the deal. It's about the terms of the dealing. Amateurism deprives athletes—again, predominantly black athletes—of freedoms and rights the rest of us take for granted. The same antitrust laws that prevent schools from<a href="http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/5/921/2341220/"> </a><a href="http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/5/921/2341220/">colluding to limit assistant basketball coach salaries</a> don't protect campus athletes, even when federal courts<a href="http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/24653743/obannon-judge-rules-ncaa-violates-antitrust-law"> </a><a href="http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/jon-solomon/24653743/obannon-judge-rules-ncaa-violates-antitrust-law">rule that the NCAA and its member schools are violating those laws</a>. Sports labor lawyer Jeffrey Kessler, who is currently leading a bellwether case against the association, <a href="http://www.alternet.org/corporate-accountability-and-workplace/outrageous-exploitation-college-athletes-finally-coming-end">says</a> athletes "don't have any rights under federal labor laws. They don't get to form a union, strike, collectively bargain, or file unfair labor practice complaints. That's not available to college athletes." Instead, they exist as second-class citizens, separate and unequal, just as the NCAA intended—according to former association director Byers, the term "student-athlete" was a legalistic ruse specifically created in the 1950s to prevent injured football players from collecting workers' compensation.<br /><br />Throughout American history, exploitation has flowed from inequality. It flowed after blacks were deemed three-fifths of a person at the original Constitutional Convention, and when they were later denied due process under Jim Crow; it flowed when women were denied the right to vote. Under Apartheid, the McCormicks write, South African laws prevented black workers from striking—sapping whatever bargaining power they otherwise might have flexed—and also mandated specific wages and hours for many blacks. Meanwhile, whites were allowed unfettered access to a free market. Sound familiar?<br /><br />"I've used the term 'racial injustice' [to describe college sports], but I try to avoid using the term 'racism,'" says Yee, the sports agent. "I can't look into someone's heart and know their intentions. But the facts are in plain view.<br /><br />"I've never ever had one of my [athlete] clients ever say to me that the current system is equitable. Nobody. In fact I have one caucasian client who grew up with black friends, played at a prominent school, has done very well for himself, came from an upper-class family. And he thinks this is one of the greatest injustices in American society. It really bothers him at his core."<br /><br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" lang="en">March Madness really is a stirring reminder of what America was founded on: making tons of money off the labor of unpaid black people<br />— Bill Maher (@billmaher) <a href="https://twitter.com/billmaher/statuses/447466828046934017">March 22, 2014</a></blockquote><br />Yee's client is in the minority, at least among whites. In 2014, a <i>Washington Post</i>/ABC News poll found that while 66 percent of non-whites supported college athlete unionization, only 38 percent of whites did. Similarly, 51 percent of non-whites favored paying college athletes—but just 24 percent of whites agreed. A HBO <i>Real Sports</i>/Marist poll last year revealed more of the same: while 59 percent of African-Americans felt college athletes should be paid, only 26 percent of whites concurred.<br /><br />Numbers like those caught the attention of Tatishe Nteta, a University of Massachusetts political science professor whose research focuses on ethnic politics. So did a 2014 soliloquy from then-ESPN radio host Colin Cowherd, who caught flack from civil rights groups after making arguably coded statements about pay-for-play. "I don't think paying all college athletes is great, not every college is loaded and most 19-year-olds (are) gonna spend it—and let's be honest, they're gonna spend it on weed and kicks," Cowherd said on air. "And spare me the 'they're being extorted' thing. Listen, 90 percent of these college guys are gonna spend it on tats, weed, kicks, Xboxes, beer and swag. They are, get over it!"<br /><br />Nteta knew from previous studies that underlying racial animus helps shape whites' attitudes toward health care, welfare, and criminal justice—in short, the more resentment a white person feels toward African-Americans, the more likely they are to oppose public policies they perceive as benefiting blacks. "Say you ask a question about building a wall between the U.S. and Mexico," Nteta says. "Rather than think about about how much that will cost, or how ridiculous the idea is, you just think about your attitudes toward undocumented immigrants and Mexicans, and that influences how your think about building a wall."<br /><br />Do white attitudes toward amateurism work the same way? In the fall of 2014, Nteta and two academic colleagues attached a set of targeted questions to a larger public opinion poll connected to Congressional midterm elections. They found that race isn't the <i>only</i> reason whites oppose pay-for-play, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2015/12/30/race-affects-opinions-about-whether-college-athletes-should-be-paid-heres-how/">but it's a major one.</a> In fact, Nteta says that negative racial views about blacks were the single most important predictor of white opposition to paying college athletes, with higher levels of resentment corresponding with higher levels of opposition. "We tried to look at factors like interest in college sports, your love of the NCAA, if you were a college athlete, if you were a union member," he says. "We found that none of that is important. But race can't be divorced from this story."<br /><br />Nteta cautions that his research is preliminary, and not quite ready to publish in an academic journal. Additional work is needed. Still, it raises an unsettling possibility: if college sports carries Branch's "whiff of the plantation," then perhaps the rest of us do, too.<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="1320px" data-original-width="1864px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/04/04/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports-body-image-1459788268.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Vice President Joe Biden poses with Villanova students at the 2016 Final Four. Photo by Robert Deutsch-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table>A few weeks ago, Yee spoke to students and faculty at the University of Virginia's School of Law, his graduate alma mater. When college sports came up, he noted that most NCAA-level women's cross-country teams are made up of white runners. He then asked listeners to participate in a thought exercise. Imagine, he said, if those teams brought in millions of dollars. Then imagine if the money mostly went to well-paid black administrators, and to black athletes competing in non-revenue sports. Would that situation be tolerated, let alone tolerated for decades?<br /><br />"The reaction was largely silence," Yee says.<br /><br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/four-years-a-student-athlete-the-racial-injustice-of-big-time-college-sports"><b>Read the original article at VICE Sports</b></a>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-34472276762183321662016-03-15T17:03:00.000-04:002016-08-23T16:02:34.488-04:00Costly Admission<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-b8QmFluX2go/VwlvlddW_1I/AAAAAAAADQ8/4zYFnfYfEW43onVhNwy8WS-QGyD1hYQYgCPcB/s1600/if-the-nfl-thinks-football-is-linked-to-cte-then-its-concussion-settlement-should-pay-for-the-disease-1458080308.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-b8QmFluX2go/VwlvlddW_1I/AAAAAAAADQ8/4zYFnfYfEW43onVhNwy8WS-QGyD1hYQYgCPcB/s1600/if-the-nfl-thinks-football-is-linked-to-cte-then-its-concussion-settlement-should-pay-for-the-disease-1458080308.jpg" /></a></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>If the NFL thinks football is linked to CTE, then its concussion settlement should pay for the disease.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | March 2016</attribution></div><br><br /><b><span class="drop-cap">F</span>ederal judges don't appreciate flimflam.</b> That ought to trouble the National Football League. During an otherwise unremarkable Congressional roundtable discussion of concussions on Monday, league senior vice president of health and safety Jeff Miller<a draggable="false" href="http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/14972296/top-nfl-official-acknowledges-link-football-related-head-trauma-cte-first"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/14972296/top-nfl-official-acknowledges-link-football-related-head-trauma-cte-first">made a remarkable admission</a>: that a link exists between football and the neurodegenerative disease chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE).<br /><br />"Mr. Miller, do you think there is a link between football and degenerative brain disorders like CTE?" asked Illinois Representative Jan Schakowsky.<br /><br />"The answer to that question is certainly yes," Miller said.<br /><br />To anyone following medical science, this was hardly groundbreaking. Researchers have found CTE in 90 of the 94 brains of former NFL players that they've studied, and in 45 of 55 former college football players. The disease has <i>only</i> been found in people who have suffered brain trauma; the majority of those individuals played contact sports. Scientists believe other unknown risk factors play a role in CTE—not everyone who plays football develops the disease, just as not everyone who smokes ends up with lung cancer—but based on current evidence, brain injury appears to be the primary factor, and likely the necessary one.<br /><br />Of course, you wouldn't know that from listening to the NFL. For more than a decade, the league has denied a connection between football and CTE, which has been found in the brains of Junior Seau, Dave Duerson, Ken Staber, Frank Gifford, Jovan Belcher and dozens of other former players. Three years ago, league commissioner Roger Goodell<a draggable="false" href="http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2013/02/04/1537191/nfl-commissioner-wont-acknowledge-link-between-football-and-brain-injuries/"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2013/02/04/1537191/nfl-commissioner-wont-acknowledge-link-between-football-and-brain-injuries/">refused to acknowledge a link</a> between his sport and brain injuries; before this year's Super Bowl, NFL-affiliated neurosurgeon Mitch Berger told writer Bruce Arthur that there was<a draggable="false" href="http://www.thestar.com/sports/football/2016/02/04/nfl-simply-refuses-to-acknowledge-concussion-reality-arthur.html"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://www.thestar.com/sports/football/2016/02/04/nfl-simply-refuses-to-acknowledge-concussion-reality-arthur.html">"no" link</a> between football and degenerative brain disorders.<br /><br />Arthur also asked Miller the same question:<br /><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><div dir="ltr" lang="en">I asked Jeff Miller about Chris Nowinski's comments that day, too. He wasn't willing to link CTE and football.</div>— Bruce Arthur (@bruce_arthur) <a href="https://twitter.com/bruce_arthur/status/709512745327190017">March 14, 2016</a></blockquote>Why so shy? Money. If the NFL can successfully pretend its occupational disease doesn't actually exist, then maybe it won't have to pay for it. To wit: the NFL has been denying—and actively arguing against—a football-CTE link in federal court. Admitting to the link undermines the proposed multimillion-dollar settlement of a class action lawsuit brought by thousands of former players that accuses the league of covering up and lying about the brain damage risks inherent to football.<br /><br />Currently being appealed by a group of retired players who object to its terms, the<a draggable="false" href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/the-nfl-concussion-settlement-is-pure-evil"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/the-nfl-concussion-settlement-is-pure-evil">settlement largely eliminates compensation for CTE and its associated clinical symptoms</a>. It figures to save the NFL hundreds of millions of dollars over the deal's 65-year life span. But thanks to Miller, the league's longstanding legal position now looks ridiculous. Actually, scratch that. Given that the NFL<a draggable="false" href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2016/03/15/nfl-stands-by-safety-officials-acknowledgement-of-cte-link-to-football/"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://https//www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2016/03/15/nfl-stands-by-safety-officials-acknowledgement-of-cte-link-to-football/">reportedly stands by Miller's admission</a>, it now looks mendacious. Downright Machiavellian. Which isn't exactly out of character for an august, All-American institution whose greatest hits include <em>League of Denial</em> and all 243 pages of the Wells Report.<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="701px" data-original-width="600px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/03/15/if-the-nfl-thinks-football-is-linked-to-cte-then-the-concussion-settlement-should-pay-for-it-body-image-1458076030.jpg?output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">That probably should be a question mark, but good work nonetheless. Photo by @NYDNSports on Twitter</td></tr></tbody></table></div>Initially announced in August 2013, the settlement basically works like this: in exchange for immunity from future lawsuits and never, ever having to reveal what it knew and when it knew it about brain damage—<a draggable="false" href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/will-smiths-concussion-doesnt-have-a-happy-ending-and-neither-does-the-real-life-nfl">"tell the truth?"</a> Nope!—the NFL will financially compensate ailing retirees. While the payouts themselves will almost certainly amount to pennies on the dollar—that is, given the<a draggable="false" href="http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/page/George-Visger/george-visger-damage-done"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://espn.go.com/espn/story/_/page/George-Visger/george-visger-damage-done">high financial and emotional costs of living with a broken brain</a>—former players suffering from Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and severe dementia symptoms will at least receive some actual cash.<br /><br />As for CTE cases? No dice. Well, maybe a few rolls. But not too many. The families of players posthumously diagnosed with the disease between January 1, 2006 and April of last year could receive up to $4 million. But <i>all</i> subsequent cases—such as Stabler,<a draggable="false" href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/adrian-robinson-is-watching-football-again-after-cte-killed-his-son"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/adrian-robinson-is-watching-football-again-after-cte-killed-his-son">Adrian Robinson</a> and Tyler Sash, who were found to have CTE last fall and this winter—get nothing. Moreover, living retirees suffering from the life-altering mood and behavior disorders associated with the disease—including depression, explosive anger, impulsive behavior—get nothing, too.<br /><br />Oh, and in case it isn't clear, every past, present and future NFL player will forfeit the right to bring a class action suit against the league over CTE claims, all in exchange for bupkus. <br /><br />If the above strikes you as odd, well, you're not alone. Jason Luckasevic,<a draggable="false" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/09/magazine/how-one-lawyers-crusade-could-change-football-forever.html"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/09/magazine/how-one-lawyers-crusade-could-change-football-forever.html">the Pittsburgh-based lawyer who filed the first brain damage suits against the NFL</a>, says that the settlement "began as a CTE case." The league's entire ongoing concussion crisis can be traced back to forensic pathologist Bennet Omalu's groundbreaking 2002 discovery of the disease in the brain of deceased Hall of Fame center Mike Webster. Yet somehow, the NFL and the class action plaintiff's lawyers who will receive over $100 million for negotiating the settlement managed to write CTE out of the agreement—a move akin to writing mesothelioma out of an asbestos case, and one that Kansas City-based brain injury lawyer Paul Anderson calculates has already kept roughly $8.4 million in the pockets of league owners and their insurers.<br /><br />Unsurprisingly, about 90 retired players are appealing the deal. Arguing that that the link between CTE and football-induced brain injuries is well-established—at least as solid as the link between the sport and the other diseases the settlement compensates—they insist that the deal should do more. It should: <br /><br />1. Compensate future cases of CTE diagnosed after death.<br /><br />2. Test and pay for the mood and behavioral symptoms associated with the disease that <a draggable="false" href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/85045740/nfl-concussion-settlement-cuts-cte-coverage-short-patrick-hruby" target="_blank">tend to afflict individuals at younger ages, and not just the cognitive symptoms that tend to begin later in life</a><br /><br /><a draggable="false" href="http://www.sportsonearth.com/article/85045740/nfl-concussion-settlement-cuts-cte-coverage-short-patrick-hruby" target="_blank"></a>3. Accommodate the future development of tests to detect CTE in living brains, something most researchers think is less than a decade away. <br /><br />In response, the NFL has maintained that CTE deserves to be left out of the settlement because "researchers have not reliably determined which events make a person more likely to develop" the disease and that "the speculation that repeated concussion or subconcussive impacts cause CTE remains unproven." (Never mind that the same can be argued about Parkinson's, ALS, Alzheimer's and dementia). During oral arguments before a federal appellate panel, NFL attorney Paul Clement stated that science was "years and years" away from proving a causal link between brain trauma and the disease. In an affidavit filed in support of the settlement, University of California, San Francisco researcher Kristine Yaffe stated that mood and behavior disorders have many risk factors and can be unrelated to CTE, which isn't the same as insisting they <em>can't </em>come from the brain damage characteristic of CTE, but whatever.<br /><br />In short, the NFL has spent two decades going from former commissioner Paul Tagliabue's insistence that brain trauma in football is a<a draggable="false" href="http://https//www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;rct=j&amp;q=&amp;esrc=s&amp;source=web&amp;cd=1&amp;cad=rja&amp;uact=8&amp;ved=0ahUKEwi32MPgwcPLAhWLrB4KHQXSA78QFggcMAA&amp;url=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.si.com%252Fnfl%252F2013%252F10%252F02%252Fleague-denial-excerpt&amp;usg=AFQjCNFFPxCxQTND73SwPd7MVZw4UpdM9w&amp;bvm=bv.116636494,d.dmo"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://https//www.google.com/url?sa=t&amp;rct=j&amp;q=&amp;esrc=s&amp;source=web&amp;cd=1&amp;cad=rja&amp;uact=8&amp;ved=0ahUKEwi32MPgwcPLAhWLrB4KHQXSA78QFggcMAA&amp;url=http%253A%252F%252Fwww.si.com%252Fnfl%252F2013%252F10%252F02%252Fleague-denial-excerpt&amp;usg=AFQjCNFFPxCxQTND73SwPd7MVZw4UpdM9w&amp;bvm=bv.116636494,d.dmo">"pack journalism issue"</a><u> </u>and demanding that Omalu's findings be retracted from a scientific journal to telling federal courts that<i> yeah, well, maybe CTE is really a thing, but who knows what causes it, or what it does to someone, and it's probably just a big coincidence that so many former football players have both the disease and the same symptoms, and an even bigger coincidence that CTE has never been found in someone who didn't experience brain trauma. </i>Is that progress? Does it begin to address the families of men like Robinson, <a draggable="false" href="http://https//sports.vice.com/en_us/article/adrian-robinson-is-watching-football-again-after-cte-killed-his-son">a league journeyman who hanged himself at age 25?</a> Or is it more of the same from an organization whose doubt-manufacturing playbook has shifted from Big Tobacco-style outright denial to fossil fuel industry-style teach-the-controversy, and whose public face, Goodell, recently compared the risks of playing football to the<a draggable="false" href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/ct-dave-duerson-roger-goodell-couch-20160207-story.html"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/ct-dave-duerson-roger-goodell-couch-20160207-story.html">"risk in sitting on the couch?</a>"<br /><br /><div class="has-image"><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="1542px" data-original-width="2490px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2016/03/15/if-the-nfl-thinks-football-is-linked-to-cte-then-the-concussion-settlement-should-pay-for-it-body-image-1458077218.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">TFW you're the only man standing between America and the coming couch-pocalypse. Photo by Matthew Emmons-USA TODAY Sports</td></tr></tbody></table></div>Back to Miller's unexpected flip-flop. It calls into question the NFL's entire position—has the league been bullshitting all this time?—and comes at a fortuitous moment. Last spring, federal judge Anita Brody approved the settlement, essentially taking the NFL at its word.<a draggable="false" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/20/sports/football/compensating-nfl-players-who-might-contract-brain-disease-met-with-skepticism.html"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/20/sports/football/compensating-nfl-players-who-might-contract-brain-disease-met-with-skepticism.html">The deal is now before</a><u> </u>appellate judges. They are hardly obligated to follow suit. On Tuesday, player lawyer Steven Molo flied a letter to the court asking that the judges consider Miller's statement, which "cannot be reconciled with the NFL's position in briefing."<br /><br />"The NFL's statements make clear that the NFL now accepts what science already knows: a 'direct link' exists between traumatic brain injury and CTE," Molo wrote. "Given that, the settlement's failure to compensate present and future CTE is inexcusable."<br /><br />Echoing Molo's logic,<a draggable="false" href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2016/03/15/concussion-case-filing-cte/81804126/"> </a><a draggable="false" href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2016/03/15/concussion-case-filing-cte/81804126/">sports attorney Daniel Wallach told USA Today</a> that that Miller's admission "could change everything" with regard to the settlement. Will it? If you accept that football and CTE are linked—the way football and the other brain disorders covered by the settlement are linked—then players diagnosed with the disease and its symptoms should be compensated. Otherwise, they should be released from the deal and allowed to sue the NFL en masse. Anything less would be unjust—a final affront to the families of Seau and so many others, and a high-priced mockery of both medical science and American jurisprudence. <br /><br />During a fairness hearing for the settlement held in Philadelphia in 2014, Brody had a verbal slip-up of her own, at one point asking a plaintiff's lawyer <i>what's TBI?</i>—never mind that <i>TBI </i>is short for <i>traumatic brain injury, </i>the very essence of the case. Brody is 80 years old. Perhaps it was a senior moment. Or perhaps it was a window into how the NFL was able to bamboozle her. Federal judges are legal geniuses, not medical experts; they rely on the evidence and information put in front of them, an issue-framing process the league's white-shoe lawyers have skillfully manipulated. (See also: Deflategate, Exponent, the aforementioned Wells Report). Thing is, the appellate judges no longer have the same excuse. Not after Miller made the mistake of telling Congress the truth. With the settlement still undecided, the old adage applies. Fool the courts once, shame on the NFL; fool them twice, and there will be plenty of shame to go around.<br /><br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/if-the-nfl-thinks-football-is-linked-to-cte-then-its-concussion-settlement-should-pay-for-the-disease"> <b>Read the original article at VICE Sports</b></a>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3878043065627433241.post-67544758837049176092015-12-23T14:25:00.000-05:002016-08-25T13:15:52.885-04:00The "Concussion" Doctor Speaks<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KS0al6uIESk/V78norh5XhI/AAAAAAAADkw/bQGTVBqDZ0czTI7mPssjrfNTHQsKpAp2QCLcB/s1600/vice-sports-qa-concussion-doctor-bennet-omalu-1450888677.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-KS0al6uIESk/V78norh5XhI/AAAAAAAADkw/bQGTVBqDZ0czTI7mPssjrfNTHQsKpAp2QCLcB/s1600/vice-sports-qa-concussion-doctor-bennet-omalu-1450888677.jpg" /></a></div><a name='more'></a><div style="text-align: center;"><subhead>A Q&amp;A with Bennet Omalu.</subhead></div><div style="text-align: center;"><attribution>By Patrick Hruby | VICE Sports | December 2015</attribution></div><br /><i><span class="drop-cap">W</span>elcome to VICE Sports Q&amp;A, where we'll talk to authors, directors, and other interesting people about interesting sports things. Think of it as a podcast, only with words on a screen instead of noises in your earbuds. This interview has been edited for clarity and length.</i><br /><br />In 2002, Nigerian-born neuropathologist Bennet Omalu discovered the neurodegenerative disease chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) in the brain of deceased former National Football League star Mike Webster. While<i> </i>CTE previously had been found in former boxers and others who had suffered repetitive head trauma, Omalu was the first researcher to find it in the brain of a former American football player—a discovery the NFL attempted to discredit and dismiss, but one that ultimately helped spur further investigations into how football can cause brain damage.<br /><br />Omalu is played by actor Will Smith in the new film <i>Concussion, </i>a drama based on the neuropathologist's real-life story. VICE Sports recently spoke with Omalu about the film, brain damage, and his <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/07/opinion/dont-let-kids-play-football.html">recent <i>New York Times</i> op-ed arguing that children should not be allowed to play tackle football.</a><br /><br /><b>VICE Sports: You had a very hard time getting people to listen to you and take your work seriously. Looking back, why do you think that was the case?</b><br /><br />Omalu: I think it's a convergence of a multiplicity of factors. Many of these things have been told to me by others. Some people have said that because I was an immigrant, a foreigner, that there was xenophobia. That I was coming in and telling Americans how to live their lives.<br /><br />Two, I was young. I was in my 30s. Maybe I was not an established name. When people heard about me, in their minds they thought I was this elderly white guy O'Malu—some Irish white guy in his 70s with gray hair who had been researching all his life in some Ivy League school!<br /><br />Another reason people have given me is that I wasn't in any Ivy League institution. I wasn't like, an established, top person in a [scientific] journal. I wasn't in a glamorous specialty. I was in a subspecialty—I was a forensic pathologist. Have you seen the movie?<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Yes.</b><br /><br />Like in the movie, you see the NFL saying, "Oh, you're just a forensic pathologist." And I'm like, "I know, I'm just a forensic pathologist." <i>[Editor's note: forensic pathology focuses on determining causes of death by examining corpses.]</i><br /><br />Then the final reasoning—having studied American culture, there is what I call the collective societal intoxication [with football]. Intoxication and addiction. Collectively, as a society. I was an outsider that possibly was not infested by that intoxication or addiction. So I talked in a non-aligned, independent, and objective manner. Maybe if I had been star struck by Mike Webster, I might not have the audacity to even open him up. Remember, in the movie, you see the other doctor telling me there was no need. I should leave him alone. But I proceeded. It was not easy for me to do an autopsy. We knew why he died.<br /><br />And then, the conformational establishment positioning—I didn't know what the NFL was in those days, but the NFL is a very powerful and influential organization. They had the ability to delegitimize me. To marginalize me. To ridicule me. So that people wouldn't believe the message because it was coming from me as a messenger. Many of their references [to me] pretty much went for the jugular.<br /><br />So I don't think it was any one single factor. Oh, there's another reason people have mentioned: it could be prejudice. Skin color. But that's not coming from me. This is other people's opinions.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Between the time frame of the film and now, in what ways has the problem of getting people to listen to you and take your work seriously changed?</b><br /><br />When I was growing up in Nigeria, I believed America was underneath heaven. God's own country. A country that was closest to what God wants us to be as his sons and daughters. A country with the largest concentration of brilliant people, a place you could be whatever you wanted to be. That was how I saw it. I came to this country to just be myself.<br /><br />So in being myself and also contributing my little part to the American narrative, I was bruised. Battered. Mangled. Chewed up. Spat out. To put it in mildest form. What shocked me most was even my fellow doctors. Even the government! Even the National Institutes of Health! At the National Institutes of Health, an official said, "Oh, she doesn't want to be involved in anything that African is involved with. That Dr. Omalu, I don't trust him." This is an official at the NIH.<br /><br />But growing up in Nigeria, I saw Hollywood as a very powerful agent of change in America. Some people call them liberals—I call them champions of freedom. Hollywood was the very first establishment that saw me lying hungry, naked, broken, cold, by the wayside. And they have reached out their hand, helped me up, led me in, opened their doors to me, welcomed me, when everyone else sent me out and called me names.<br /><br />So Hollywood, being part of that American experience, it has reaffirmed my faith in this country I love so much.<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="506px" data-original-width="900px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2015/12/23/vice-sports-qa-concussion-doctor-bennet-omalu-body-image-1450887886.jpg?output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Will Smith plays Bennet Omalu in "Concussion." Courtesy YouTube</td></tr></tbody></table><b>Are there any ways in which having your story told in a Hollywood movie—and you have Will Smith portraying you—are there any ways that has changed your ability to get your message across?</b><br /><br />No, no, this has never been about me—which has differentiated me from some of the other doctors doing this work. I've never wanted this to be about me. I've always wanted it to be about the goodwill for the players and their families. When this all started out, I thought they were suffering in obscurity. They were just expendable assets for the NFL to be used and dumped.<br /><br />So, with the movie opening, I'm very excited for the players. For their families. For Mike Webster. They have all been vindicated by Hollywood. And the young child out there who is having problems, and the parents are not thinking,<i> Could exposure to repeated head blows have contributed to these problems?</i> They all have been vindicated.<br /><br />Even the [football] industry, even the NFL has been vindicated. Hollywood has put the word out. The NFL couldn't have done it!<br /><br />People think this movie is about football. No, it's not. And it's not anti-football. I've never been anti-football. Some people may have misappropriated me. Remember, when I discovered this disease [in a former football player]<i>,</i> I took it to the NFL joyfully. "Hey, look at what I found. Let's enhance the game. Let's enhance the players."<br /><b><br /></b> <b>Let's talk about medicine and science. The film is called <i data-redactor-tag="i">Concussion</i>, but the underlying health problem with football isn't simply concussions, is it?</b><br /><br />That is true. The issue is about blows to the head in whatever activity you do. So the best approach is mitigation of risk. Avoid activities that expose you to repeated blows to the head, because you can suffer brain damage with or without concussions. The subconcussive blows.<br /><br />The name <i>Concussion</i>? That is what is called branding. Business management. What is the terminology of what you can use that can enhance brand recall and optimize people's attention? The name is valuable for that, but in no way does it suggest the scientific basis of the concept.<br /><br />Another thing I need to point out: the [football] industry will want people to focus on concussion, because it makes it easier for them. That was why last year, what did the NFL do during the Super Bowl? They came out and announced that concussions were down by, I think, 23 percent [<a href="http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/12248483/nfl-says-concussions-25-percent-year">from 2012</a>]. That is a marketing gimmick. They have every right to say that. There's nothing wrong with it. But in terms of the truth, it is not about concussions. It is about blows to the head.<br /><b><br /></b> <b>The film deals with your discovery of CTE in the brains of Mike Webster and other former football players—but again, when we are looking at getting hit in the head repeatedly and the brain damage that can cause, is CTE the only problem we have to worry about?</b><br /><br />CTE is part of a spectrum [of brain damage]. When you suffer a blow—a single blow or repetitive—you may have immediate symptoms or may not have immediate symptoms. But the absence of symptoms does not mean you haven't suffered cellular injury. You may have immediate symptoms, and after a while they dissipate. In some people, those symptoms do not disappear. They continue for months. That is what you call post-concussion syndrome. Some people may develop epilepsy. Some football players have epilepsy.<br /><br />Some of the damage is not progressive—you develop a disorder, and it stays that way. CTE is neurodegenerative. It gets worse. Concussion is part of the spectrum, but it is not the underlying cause. The underlying cause is [brain trauma], the factor that initiated the cascade of events.<br /><br /><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody><tr><td style="text-align: center;"><img data-original-height="1593px" data-original-width="1980px" src="//sports-images.vice.com/images/2015/12/23/vice-sports-qa-concussion-doctor-bennet-omalu-body-image-1450888171.jpg?resize=1220:*&amp;output-quality=75" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;" /></td></tr><tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">The writer with Bennet Omalu, right. Courtesy Patrick Hruby</td></tr></tbody></table><div class="photo-credit"><br /></div><b>You recently published a<i data-redactor-tag="i"> </i>New<i> </i>York<i> Times</i> op-ed calling for an age limit for tackle football, the same way we have legal ages for smoking and drinking. Related to that, researchers in Boston have diagnosed CTE in the brains of six of 26 former high school football players and 41 of 50 former college players that have been examined. The same researchers are also seeing cases where CTE <i>symptoms</i> are showing up in young men who are in their 20s and 30s—</b><br /><br />Not just that. There was a paper about this from the Mayo Clinic just last week.<b> </b><br /><i>[In December, <a href="https://www.yahoo.com/health/cte-high-school-sports-232238493.html">Mayo Clinic researchers announced</a> that they had examined 66 brains from the clinic's brain bank belonging to men who had played contact sports in their youth—amateurs, not professionals—and found CTE in 21 of those brains. Researchers did not find the disease in 198 brains from people who lacked a documented history of participating in contact sports].</i><br /><b><br /></b> <b>—yet when you were first discovering and investigating this disease, you were dealing with men who had played many years of professional football. At that time, did you ever suspect we would see CTE in athletes who never played professionally, and what do you make of the fact that we are seeing that now?</b><br /><br />What I want to tell people is I am excited and happy when I see independent doctors revalidating and confirming CTE. That makes me feel good. When I was researching, looking for a name for this disease, the fact that blows to the head causes brain damage was known as far back as the 18th century.<br /><br />So when I hear doctors denying, saying that we need more research—what do you need? If I tell you that a gun—if you shoot a gun it your head it is going to kill you—do you need research to find out if it can kill you? That is too much! This is a generally accepted principle and common knowledge.<br /><br />If you are an adult, and you make up your mind to play [football], I will be the first to stand behind you and support your right to play. But a child hasn't reached the age of consent. A child should become an adult before they make the decision to expose themselves to a harmful factor. This is the humanity of science.<br /><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/vice-sports-qa-concussion-doctor-bennet-omalu" target="_blank"><br /></a> <b><a href="https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/vice-sports-qa-concussion-doctor-bennet-omalu" target="_blank">Read the original article at VICE Sports</a></b>Patrick Hrubyhttps://plus.google.com/102548095505239354235noreply@blogger.com